Switchgrass: Finally a viable biofuel

Using switchgrass as a source of energy could take off, supporters say, if we stop thinking of it as a liquid-fuel replacement

By Jerry Langton CBC News

John Fike, a Virginia Tech researcher, combs through switchgrass at the school's agricultural center in Orange, Va. According to a five-year study conducted by researchers at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln, switchgrass grown for biofuel delivered 540 per cent more energy than was needed to grow, harvest and process it. (The Washington Post, Tracy A. Woodward/AP) While the idea of using switchgrass as a biofuel has been around for a while, it really hasn't taken off. It still could, supporters say, if people would simply start using it the right way.

Switchgrass is a perennial grass native to much of the prairie. It grows extremely quickly, sometimes up to 2.2 metres tall. It grows on land not considered suitable for food crops, yielding about 15 to 20 tonnes per hectare. And, when dried, it burns very efficiently.

When the idea that this hardy, native plant could be a source of cellulose for biofuel emerged in the early 1990s, the media began to postulate that it wouldn't be long before Canadians would be relying on this former weed to solve their energy woes. No less an authority than David Suzuki wrote an essay called Fill 'Er Up With Switchgrass in which he indicated we'd all be filling our tanks with biofuel before long.

It was a ready-for-prime-time story: Here was a weed that grew in places not suitable for traditional food crops. It had already developed its own effective defences against insects — reducing the need for pesticides — as well as against drought, flood and poor soil. And it's a perennial, so you don't have to worry about planting it every year.

That switchgrass could be burned to make energy seemed like a modern-day miracle.

Reality check

Fast-forward to today, and not only aren't Canadians filling up with switchgrass biofuel, it's not even being cultivated in any large way.

About 40 farms in Canada dedicate a mere 600 hectares to switchgrass, using it mainly for livestock bedding, a base for growing mushrooms, or in low-quality fibreboard.

The biggest grower of switchgrass for fuel receives not a penny of federal funding. Roger Samson, executive director of Resource Efficient Agriculture Production Canada (REAP), a non-profit research organization, said it's as though switchgrass was relegated to the scrap heap as an energy source.

"The federal government doesn't seem to want anything to do with switchgrass," said Samson. "They're betting taxpayer money on other fuel sources."

The federal government has dedicated $2.2 billion to biofuel research, of which $500 million has been earmarked for "next-generation" projects. That $500 million is administered by Sustainable Technology Development Canada (STDC), a not-for-profit foundation.

"We look at the viability of any fuel source as far as supply," said Patrice Breton, the STDC's director of communications. "We want to get beyond the food-versus-fuel debate, and have looked at things like wheat sheaves, corn husks, wood chips and even garbage as a viable energy feedstock."

But none of the research money has yet been handed out for projects like this.

"We put out the criteria, people apply, we go out and kick the tires and, potentially, fund the project," he said. "We launched in the fall and have one application we are considering."

That application is from Iogen, an Ottawa-based company that makes cellulose ethanol from farm leftovers, while producing essential enzymes used in paper manufacture and animal feed.

"We had lots of very interesting conversations," said Breton. "But only one viable application so far."

Liquid or solid for gas?

The problem, Samson said, is that the federal government seems fixated on using liquid fuels for energy, and that's not good for switchgrass — at least with our current technology. Making any plant material like switchgrass into a liquid fuel is a complex and difficult process.

"It takes up as much energy as it produces," said Samson.

Researcher Steve Gulick harvests switchgrass at the Virginia Tech center in Orange, Va. Switchgrass is a perennial grass native to much of the Canadian prairie, it grows extremely quickly (sometimes up to 2.2 metres tall), and can be grown on land not considered suitable for food crops, yielding about 15 to 20 tonnes per hectare. (The Washington Post, Tracy A. Woodward/AP) University of Massachusetts-Amherst resea

rchers George Huber, Torren Carlson and Tushar Vispute have managed to transform switchgrass and poplar trees — another non-food plant Canada has plenty of — into high-grade gasoline (rather than ethanol). Even so, they admit that a viable application of their feat is still at least a decade away.

"The challenge for chemical engineers is to efficiently produce liquid fuels from biomass while fitting into the existing infrastructure today," said Huber.

Samson has a different idea. Instead of burning fossil fuels to make switchgrass into a liquid, why not just burn the switchgrass?

At REAP's farm and research facility in Ste-Anne-de-Belleville, Quebec, they cut the switchgrass down in November, just before it snows, then harvest it in April after the snow has melted away. The winter dries the plant enough so that it just has to be compressed into fuel pellets.

Samson doesn't expect people to fill their gas tanks with pellets, but that's not his point.

"The biggest user of energy — and the biggest contributor of greenhouses gasses to the environment — in this country isn't transportation, it's thermal," he said, and renewable solid fuels could be used instead of non-renewable liquid heating fuels and gas. "Heating our houses and institutions with pellets would reduce fossil fuel use and greenhouse gas emissions in huge way."

According to a five-year study conducted by researchers at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln, switchgrass grown for biofuel production produced 540 per cent more energy than was needed to grow, harvest and process it.

"This clearly demonstrates that switchgrass is not only energy efficient, but can be used in a renewable biofuel economy to reduce reliance of fossil fuels, reduce greenhouse gas emissions and enhance rural economies," said Ken Vogel, a U.S. Department of Agriculture-Agricultural Research Service geneticist.

REAP's pellets, which look like green charcoal briquettes, can be used in the same applications as coal or natural gas, according to Samson. And they yield seven times as much energy per hectare of land as corn does.

And switchgrass as a heating fuel can be cheaper than natural gas.

"If a final pelleted price of $150 a tonne is considered, switchgrass pellets as source of energy would cost in the range of $7 to $8 per gigajoule," said Glenn Friesen, business development specialist for Manitoba Agriculture, Food and Rural Initiatives. "If a comparison energy source of natural gas is priced at $17 per cubic metre, then it has been estimated that an average homeowner would recoup the costs of a pellet stove purchase in three to four years [based on pellet stove price of approximately $3,000]."

Electrifying possibilities

Since the pellets can be burned as fuel by existing infrastructure, such as coal-fired power plants, Samson said that the liquefaction problem for automobiles is moot — if people switch to electric cars.

"It can be burned in a power plant to make electricity," he said. "So why not use that electricity to power vehicles?"

It's a scenario he sees as beneficial not just for the air in Central Canada, but also for the economy.

"Look at Ontario, their economy is in recession and they are importing coal from the U.S. and natural gas from Western Canada to make energy," he said. "And now the federal government wants them to use ethanol — when Ontario is also a net importer of corn; it doesn't make sense."

'It [switchgrass] can grow on marginal farmland, unfit for food crops," Samson said. "So it wouldn't compete with them.'— REAP's Roger Samson

And the hardy plant could grow well in Ontario, where it occurs naturally in some places.

"It can grow on marginal farmland, unfit for food crops," Samson said. "So it wouldn't compete with them."

He adds that he's had success farming switchgrass and other hardy native grasses in many different types of conditions. "Soil that's too wet, soil that's too dry, soil on an incline — none have been a problem. I went down to Mississippi after Hurricane Katrina and saw some switchgrass that had been under water for more than 30 days — it was fine."

Despite all that it has going for it, Samson said that the federal government just isn't interested in switchgrass. He says he is still waiting for the government or STDC to recognize switchgrass as a solid fuel alternative.

Gary Kellar, spokesman for the federal Ministry of Energy, points out that conventional ethanol and biodiesel represent the first generation of biofuel. "We're big on the next generation of biofuels. Cellulosic ethanol - fuel made from farm products not used as food — is what we see as that next generation."

Samson and other switchgrass supporters agree - and they would like to see that approach put into action in Canada now.

"Instead of exploring alternatives, they [the Canadian government] are trying to pick winners," Samson said. "And if they are going with things like coal and corn ethanol, I think they're picking the wrong ones."

Academic errors on biofuel, ag policy

Which direction the sun comes up in the morning is an academic issue, not a matter of opinion. If on the nightly news it was reported that the sun comes up in the West as fact, you’d lose faith in the validity of the broadcast pretty fast, to the point of questioning the creditability of the broadcaster.

Major media sources and even a presidential candidate, John McCain, have been making academic errors telling everyone that the sun comes up in the West regarding biofuel and ag policy. From someone who knows which direction the sun actually rises, it’s been rather frustrating and incredible to see this misinformation be distributed to the public as fact.

When you hear a major network report as fact that global wheat and rice shortages were created because of biofuels, they just told an academic lie. Biofuel development had no impact on wheat and rice acres or the recent higher prices evidenced in those markets. Biofuel happened to be in the neighborhood when global/consumer demand surged and poor yields were produced and were blamed for the result as a convenient suspect. Biofuel was made guilty without evidence to convict by an incompetent media who has not done its job relative to agriculture.

Ag Committee Chairman, Collin Peterson, expressed great frustration with the media in a news conference, “The problem is we’ve got editorial writers still, to this day, writing that the whole $300 billion (in the Farm Bill) goes to farmers.

The truth is, out of the $300 billion, something like $36 or $40 billion goes to farmers. The rest, the majority, goes to nutrition and conservation. I implore my friends in the press to help us get people to understand just how this is structured.”

Instead, virtually every news story on the Farm Bill says $300 billion is going to rich farmers when only 16.1% of that total goes to commodity programs, crop insurance and disaster income. That total is down from 28.5% in the previous bill, the one that George W. signed, written by Republicans, in 2002.

They saved $20 billion in the commodity title of the current bill. That’s not the spin opponents want. 73.5% of Farm Bill spending goes to food programs. These are academic facts being distorted by everyone from the Wall Street Journal on down who are slanting their reporting, focused entirely on subsidy means testing which has been substantially tightened too.

It’s the same story with food versus fuel. John McCain tells everyone the reason food prices have gone up is ethanol, so the Renewable Fuels Standard (RFS) needs rolled back. He’d get rid of the Blenders Credit and tariff too. Finally, USDA Ag Sec Ed Schafer stepped up and commented recently in an attempt to straighten out what has been the press reporting verbatim inaccuracies as fact in the fuel versus food debate. “We think the time has come for USDA to join in the conversation of food and biofuels. There is not a one-on-one relationship between commodity prices and food prices.”

First of all, the Ag Sec was late to the debate. The Bush Administration let inaccuracies go unanswered so the press ran with them. They even supported inaccuracies portrayed by the press in their political opposition to the Farm Bill.

Scott McClellen’s successor is now sponsoring the Farm Bill. The administration is more friendly to biofuels. The USDA belatedly but correctly told the public what we have been saying - that food is only 20% of the retail food dollar.

The Council of Economic Advisors say that yes, corn prices have gone up sharply but only contributes about 3% to the commodity portion, the 20% of the food dollar. There is not the direct one-on-one link between corn prices and ethanol and food prices that John McCain has claimed in his letter asking for an EPA waiver from the RFS.

Here are academic facts that have not been reported correctly by the mainstream media. A family of four in 2007 spent $9,828 on food (USDA) and $4,549 on gasoline (EIA). In 2008, if there were no biofuel, food expenditure for the family would have been $24 lower. Yes, biofuels cost a family of four $24 in higher food costs, according to the Council of Economic Advisors Ed Lazear. Biofuel, however, lowers what that family of four pays for gasoline.

If you heard a media report that all oil from Nigeria, the U.S. 6th largest oil exporter, was being embargoed by John McCain, what do you suppose it would do to the U.S. oil market? U.S. biofuel production equals oil imports from Nigeria.

The price of gasoline would soar, wouldn’t it? In both aggregate supply and refinery capacity, ethanol lowers the price of gasoline. If biofuel was eliminated, that family of four would pay more for gasoline, $560 a year more according to LECG economist John Urbarchuk, $784 a year according to Merrill Lynch research and possibly even $1616 more per year in a worst case scenario calculated by ISU’s Center for Ag and Rural Development.

The family of four would save $24 on food and spend from $536-1592 more on gasoline without ethanol and biofuel. Without ethanol to lower fuel costs, higher fuel costs would raise food prices more than biofuels have.

John McCain and his 23 GOP Senator partners asking for an EPA RFS waiver are telling you the sun comes up in the West as their contribution to the food versus fuel debate. Ethanol has lowered fuel prices, saving consumers far, far more than the increase in the price of corn has raised food prices. The sun comes up in the East.

Some news - اخبار جدید سوخت زیستی

Over 500 registered for Biofuels International expo & conference
The inaugural Biofuels International expo and conference is now only days away, and places are going fast.
>> click here for more

Brazil and Germany co-operate on biofuels
Brazil president Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva and German chancellor Angela Merkel signed cooperation agreements on 14 May for environment and renewable energy, including biofuels.
>> click here for more

Denmark commits to biodiesel research
The Danish National Advanced Technology Foundation has granted DKK 15 million (€2 million) towards research in biodiesel until 2012.
>> click here for more

Petrotec keeps sales steady despite severe market conditions
Germany-based Petrotec, a manufacturer of biodiesel from used cooking oil, has reported its sales figures for Q1 2008.
>> click here for more

Greenfield Project Management and PvT Capital connect for Chernobyl biofuels
German bioenergy expert PvT Capital and Ireland-based bioethanol developer Greenfield Project Management have agreed to jointly develop Greenfield's proposed ethanol refineries in Belarus.
>> click here for more

Basic Energy plans Philippines ethanol plant
The Philippines-based Basic Energy Corp (BEC) will construct a multi-feedstock ethanol plant in partnership with a Taiwanese group.
>> click here for more

Xethanol announces financial results
US-based renewable energy company Xethanol Corporation has reported financial results for Q1, ending 31 March 2008, reporting a net loss of $2.0 million (€1.26 million), or ($0.07) per share, as compared to a $5.5 million net loss, or ($0.19) per share, for the same period of the previous year.
>> click here for more

US DoE grants funds for SunEthanol cellulosic ethanol
The US Department of Energy (DoE) has awarded Massachusetts-headquartered SunEthanol a $100,000 (€634,000) research grant to help the US develop clean transportation fuels from a variety of non-food feedstocks, including corn stover, bagasse, switchgrass, sorghum, softwood (pine), and high lignin poplar.
>> click here for more

Blackhawk Biofuels completes acquisition
Illinois-based Blackhawk Biofuels has completed the acquisition of assets of a 45 million gallon a year biodiesel production facility under construction in Danville, Illinois, from Biofuels Company of America.
>> click here for more

Cascade Grain to reach full ethanol capacity
Vancouver-based Cascade Grain's newly built ethanol plant in Oregon, the largest producer of corn ethanol on the West Coast, is expected to reach full production in June.
>> click here for more

New biofuel sources may not be food

New biofuel sources may not be food, but they could prove invasive

 

By Elisabeth Rosenthal

Food crops such as wheat being used for biofuel in Egypt. Fears over diverting food crops have led to "second-generation" biofuels made from nonfood crops like reeds and wild grasses. Toru Hanai/Reuters

In the past year, the world has witnessed the unintended effects of diverting food crops like corn and palm to make biofuel: In part because of competition from the hot biofuels market, food prices are skyrocketing and food stocks vanishing. Rain forest is being cut down to grow more "green" fuel.

As such problems have emerged, it has become almost a mantra among investors and politicians that newer "second-generation" biofuels - made from nonfood crops like reeds and wild grasses - would provide green energy, without taking food off the table.

Second-generation biofuel plantations growing jatropha, a genus of succulents, have sprung up all over Africa. In the United States and Europe, plans abound to grow crops like switch grass and giant reed for energy and fuels.

Now, biologists and botanists are warning that these second-generation biofuels may have serious unintended consequences as well: Most of these newer crops are what scientists label invasive species - weeds - which they say have high potential to escape plantations, overrun adjacent farms and natural land, and create economic and ecological havoc.

At a United Nations meeting in Bonn on Tuesday, scientists from the Global Invasive Species Program, the Nature Conservancy and the International Union for Conservation of Nature as well as other groups issued a warning worthy of Cassandra.

"Some of the most commonly recommended species for biofuels production are also major invasive alien species," their paper says, adding that these crops should be studied more before being cultivated for biofuel production in new areas.

Controlling the spread of such plants could prove difficult, the experts said, producing "greater financial losses than gains." As the International Union put it: "Don't let invasive biofuel crops attack your country."

To reach their conclusions, the scientists matched the list of the most popular second-generation biofuels with a list of invasive species and found an alarming degree of overlapping. They said little evaluation of risk had occurred before planting.

"With biofuels, there's always a hurry,' said Geoffrey Howard, an expert on invasive species with the International Union. "Plantations are started by investors - often from the U.S. or Europe - so they are eager to generate biofuels within a couple of years and also, as you might guess, they don't want a negative assessment."

The biofuels industry says the risk that biofuel crops will become weed problems is overstated, noting that proposed crops, while they have some "weedy" potential, are not inevitably  invasive.

"There are very few plants that are 'weeds' - full stop," said Willy De Greef, incoming secretary general of the EuropaBio, an industry group. "You have to look at the biology of the plant and the environment where you're introducing it and ask, are there worry points here?"

He said that biofuel farmers would inevitably introduce new crops carefully, because they would not want growth they could not  control.

The EU and the United States have both instituted biofuel targets as a method of reducing carbon emissions; the EU target of 10 per cent biofuel use in transport by 2020 is binding. As a result, politicians are eagerly awaiting the commercial perfection of second-generation biofuels.

The EU is funding a project to introduce the "giant reed, a high-yielding, nonfood plant into EU agriculture." The reed is an "environmentally friendly" and cost-effective crop, poised to become the "champion of biomass crops," the project proposal says.

A proposed Florida biofuel plantation and plant, also using giant reed, has been greeted with enthusiasm by investors, its energy sold even before the facility is built.

But the project has been opposed by the Florida Native Plants Society and a number of scientists, who say giant reed growth could endanger the nearby Everglades. The giant reed - previously used mostly as a decorative plant and to make musical instruments - is a fast-growing thirsty species that has drained wetlands and clogged drainage systems in other places where it has been planted. Highly flammable, it increases the risk of fires.

From a business perspective, the good thing about second-generation biofuel crops is that they are easy to grow and need little attention. But that is also what creates their invasive potential.

"These are tough survivors, which means they're good producers for biofuel because they grow well on marginal land that you wouldn't use for food," Howard said. "But we've had 100 years of experience with introductions of these crops that turned out to be disastrous for environment, people, health."

Stas Burgiel, a scientist at the Nature Conservancy, said the cost of controlling invasive species was "immense," and generally not paid by those who created the problem.

But he and other experts emphasized that some of the second-generation biofuel crops could still be safe, if introduced into the right places and under the right conditions

"With biofuels we need to do proper assessments and take appropriate measures, so they don't get out of the gate, so to speak," Burgiel said. He added that assessment must take a broad geographical perspective, since invasive species don't respect borders. "If Florida says no and the investors go next door, you've got the problem anyway," he said.

The Global Invasive Species Program estimates that the damage from invasive species already costs the world more than $1.4 trillion annually - 5 percent of the global economy.

History is filled with well-meaning introductions gone bad, as plants transported from one part of the world to another thrive uncontrollably in a new country that lacks their natural predators.

Decades ago, mesquite was introduced into Australia and Africa for charcoal production, as well as to provide shade and reduce erosion. Decades later, "it has turned into a monster,' Howard said, invading millions of hectares of pastureland in places like Australia and Ethiopia and rendering them unusable.

"It all covered by awful spiny bushes so that people and their animals can't find anything to eat," said Howard, an Australian. "We want to make sure that doesn't happen again through biofuels."

Jatropha, the darling of the second-generation biofuel community is being cultivated widely in East Africa and promoted by entrepreneurs and organizations like the Clinton Foundation. But jatropha was recently banned by two Australian states as an invasive species. If jatropha, which is poisonous, overgrows farmland or pasture the result could be a disaster for local food supply in Africa, experts say.

But De Greef, of EuropaBio, said jatropha had little weed potential in most areas. He added: "Just because a species has caused a problem in one place, doesn't make it a weed everywhere."

Biodiesel’s True Calling

Biodiesel’s True Calling

From :American Fuels website

As biodiesel struggles for widespread acceptance as a transportation fuel, it has found a warm, cozy home in the residential heating oil market.

By Ron Kotrba

Heating oil has a reputation of antiquation. It’s one of those unique forms of energy able to conjure imagery of weather-worn New Englanders in old Victorian town homes, or the dying breed of Midwestern farmer aging alongside crumbling agrarian empires of rusty implements and dilapidated buildings. Short, gray days when life slows to a crawl atop the packed, accumulating snow; the vicious circle of snowfall and shoveling, plowing and blowing, only to do it all over again tomorrow; cold, long, dark nights spent inside looking out.

The Northeast and central Atlantic states have by far the highest concentration of heating oil usage compared with other regions—the Energy Information Administration reports 83 percent in 2005—but homes sparsely peppered across the nation are warmed by oil in the fall, winter and early spring months. Nationwide, slightly more than 8 million households out of 107 million, or 7.5 percent of U.S. homes, burn heating oil for warmth, according to the U.S. EPA. National Oilheat Research Alliance President John Huber says this represents about 10 billion gallons of diesel fuel a year.

In the fall, weather projections indicating colder than normal winter temperatures typically induce supply and pricing fears in the heating oil markets sending prices upward. This winter, record-high heating oil prices were expected even though the National Oceanic and Atmosphereic Administrations outlook covering the first three months of 2008 predicted above-average temperatures for most of the continental United States. However, temperatures in the Northeast, from New York to Maine, were given a big question mark—an equal chance of above-average, normal or below-average temperatures for those same three winter months. Despite the unknown in the Northeast and warmer winter weather throughout the rest of the country, heating oil prices are expected to hit record highs this winter. “We’re close to an all-time high for heating oil, in inflation-adjusted dollars,” Huber told Biodiesel Magazine in November. “1980 is still a touch higher, but we’re getting up into that range now. I’ve heard people pricing up in the $3.30 to $3.50 a gallon range for delivered heat.” The EIA’s short-term energy outlook formulated in November 2007 forecasts heating oil prices to hit season highs in first quarter 2008 at $3.07 a gallon in the Northeast and $3.08 a gallon out west for delivered heat, including state taxes.

Armed with a list of advantages fuel oil has over its competition, this energy with an aging reputation is being repackaged for a new generation of consumers. Despite information from EIA, which states most older U.S. homes outside New England have replaced oil burners with propane or natural gas, and that oil no longer has an appreciable share of the new construction market, heating oil advocacy groups and fuel distributors bill heating oil, especially when blended with biodiesel, as clean, safe and affordable. Moreover, new systems technologies with greater utility are emerging, and may help heating oil and biodiesel gain footing as an attractive source for residential heating, air conditioning and electricity.

Comparisons
EIA Administrator Guy Caruso recently testified before a legislative subcommittee in Washington D.C., where he told Congress that depending on temperatures this winter, residents using electricity for heat could expect a 3 percent price increase, natural gas an 11 percent increase, propane a 20 percent increase and heating oil an increase of 26 percent compared with the previous year. Andrew Schuyler, director for the Northeast Biofuels Collaboration, tells Biodiesel Magazine the oil industry has systematically scaled down petroleum bulk storage capacity over the past two decades. If bulk storage capacity is lean, then increasing heating oil production to meet expected increases in demand would do no good because there would be no place to store the excess supply. But that’s only part of the story. “While some of this can be attributed to changes in crude oil availability, the consolidation of the oil industry and its preference for tight supplies is well documented,” Schuyler says. “There’s been a lot of talk about the industry’s use of ‘just-in-time’ inventory management, which is designed to ensure that product only arrives at retail points when it’s needed. While this clearly increases profits, it also leaves regions like the northeast vulnerable to any type of supply disruptions, such as weather or geopolitical events.” Despite this news, fuel distributors and proponents of heating oil say when adjusted for inflation and on a per million British thermal units basis, heating oil is still an economical choice. “Natural gas prices have not moved up as steadily as petroleum prices have risen,” Huber says. “This has a lot to do with the fundamentals of petroleum, and of biodiesel. It’s an international market for those products, so as the dollar declines in value, they’ve got to make it up, so the price has gone up. Natural gas is still very much a domestic market. America has had a bit of a manufacturing recession after Katrina and Rita, so a lot of demand for natural gas has still been depressed but the supply has been there.” So while natural gas prices appear more attractive than heating oil this winter, propane, which consists of 50 percent petroleum and 50 percent natural gas, is less so. “Propane is still probably more expensive than heating oil,” Huber continues. “In general, propane has been more expensive and according to the DOE will continue to be higher priced in the market.” Even at record petroleum highs, biodiesel is still priced higher than diesel fuel at the retail level. “The two products, biodiesel and fuel oil, track each other,” Huber says. “If biodiesel is a little more or a little less than petroleum, you’re going to have a market. You can’t go much higher or you’ll lose market, and if you go much lower, then you’ll sell out instantly, so it’s got to be in range.”
In December, just as ASTM was expected to pass a B5 measure in D975, the on-road diesel fuel spec, advocates for biodiesel use in home heating applications expect D396, the heating oil spec, to do the same. NORA and the National Biodiesel Board have trademarked the name “Bioheat” to market home heating oil blended with quality biodiesel up to and including 20 percent. “We’re still completing our research so we have not settled on what that exact blend should be,” Huber says. “But when the ASTM ballot for B5 in D396 is passed, we’ll move the Bioheat trademark to say it means a 5 percent blend. … I would rather move the industry up 5 [percent], 7 [percent] or 9 percent as opposed to moving it up 50 percent, or using off-spec product, and then having disasters and getting the idea into the general community that this product doesn’t work as heating oil.”

Heating oil blends higher than B30 are not recommended, and results from a comprehensive study undertaken over several years at Brookhaven National Laboratory in Upton, N.Y., in conjunction with New York State Energy Research and Development Authority, explain why. While heating oil blends up to and including B30 displayed as good or even better combustion and operational characteristics than pure petroleum heating oil, “it was observed that, with blends of over 30 percent biodiesel concentration, the cadmium sulfide flame sensor would sometimes not see the flame sufficiently and, hence, the control system would shut down the burner as a safety precaution,” C.R. Krishna, BNL, and R.J. Albrecht, NYSERDA, wrote in a paper detailing BNL’s findings. “This occurrence was a function of the system, the airflow settings, the control system parameters, the [B]ioheat blend ratios, etc., and was not seen in all the systems tested. Caution is therefore suggested in the use of [B]ioheat blends with high biodiesel concentrations.” Huber explains those findings. “With some of the higher blends, the fuel is burning so cleanly that the cadmium cell that’s traditionally been used in the industry will not register the light waves,” he says. “It’s almost a pure-white flame [with biodiesel] whereas oil tends to burn yellow. Realistically, a lot of next-generation sensors on furnaces are using ultra violet where this will not be an issue. But we have 8 million to 10 million homes using the existing equipment, so we can’t get ahead of what customers’ equipment can do.”

Not only do higher blend levels increase the possibility of operational issues, but BNL also states one of its primary findings in its lengthy study was that somewhere between B30 and B40, the upper limit on viscosity as defined in D396, was reached. BNL also determined, not surprisingly, that the pour and cold filter plugging points of heating oil increased proportionately to the blend, “but proper cold weather additives can more than offset any such increase.” In addition, the flash point increases as the biodiesel percentage increases, and can be used by fuel distributors and advocacy groups as an additional selling point for the safety of biodiesel-blended heating oil. The BNL study also replicated what other open-flame combustion tests of biodiesel have displayed over the years, the reduction of nitrogen oxide emissions. Particulate matter emissions (2.5 micron size), directly and primarily dependent on the fuel’s sulfur content, were shown by BNL to decrease proportionally as biodiesel percentages increase.

New Markets
Cleaner, safer and economically competitive on a per-Btu basis, biodiesel-blended heating oil is an attractive energy choice. “In a world concerned with global warming and as a nation trying to move away from relying on the Middle East, our industry has been very receptive to Bioheat,” Huber says. According to Schuyler, “If there was ever a time to convince elected officials that we need to seriously alter our relationship with fossil fuels, it’s now. We may have reached the so-called ‘perfect energy storm’—we have high energy prices, a war that Alan Greenspan recently noted is largely about oil, and the words ‘climate change’ rolling off the lips of every serious candidate for president.”
If only 5 percent of the 10 billion gallons of heating oil consumed annually in the United States was replaced with biodiesel, this would represent a 500 million gallon market—more than the U.S. biodiesel industry produced last year. Some states already have legislation on the books requiring use of biodiesel-blended heating oil in municipal buildings. Other state legislatures such as Massachusetts deliberated bills requiring low-blend mandates. All of these efforts would help get biodiesel usage in home heating oil to the B5 market saturation level. “But this doesn’t mean a top limit, so if you’re in that market, there can be some room for long-term growth in some of the offshoots we’re looking at,” Huber says.

These “offshoots” include combinatory heating, air conditioning and power generation systems for single-family homes. Hot water systems utilizing heat generated from combustion of heating oil, which essentially heat water for free when the heat is on, already exist and are gaining in popularity. NORA and equipment manufacturers are looking to go one or several steps further than this. “In the heating oil industry, we essentially have a tank of fuel at someone’s home,” Huber explains. “That presents some great opportunities, one of which is trying to develop electricity to supply backup for people using heating oil. Or if electricity rates go up high enough, they can produce their own power at home. Electricity rates are going up all around the country pretty radically.” In states like Alabama, Kentucky or Tennessee, where lower-priced

Tennessee Valley Authority power is accessible, this might not be as attractive an option as it would be in other states. “In New England, they’re using power from either high-priced nuclear plants or high-priced oil or gas plants,” Huber says. The closer energy is made to its end user, the less that’s lost. “That is something that could make this very attractive at some point,” Huber says. NORA has an ongoing project investigating the possibility of powering air conditioning, the heat pump for which is typically run by electricity, with heating oil too, so one unit could supply both the heat and the air conditioning for the home. Biodiesel Magazine will follow these developments as they progress.

Higher-priced biodiesel, even without government usage requirements, would still command a presence in the marketplace. “Probably not as much,” Schuyler says. “But there is definitely a segment of the population, particularly in the Northeast, who are willing to purchase slightly more expensive, value-added products. On the other hand, people who are struggling financially may not be able to afford any price increase. Therefore I think one of our biggest challenges is to diversify our fuel markets, which will lead to lower costs for both traditional and alternative fuels. In other words, a healthy biodiesel market will compete directly with petroleum for market share, and that competition will be good for consumers, the economy and the environment.”

Huber says a lot of dealers market bio because they think it’s an attractive ecological product and it sets them apart as a better industry. “There’s demand for it—current demand—and even if the price for Bioheat is a bit higher, those who are running fuel distribution companies are saying, ‘I want to be a quality company that sells this type of product.’”

Ron Kotrba is a Biodiesel Magazine senior writer. Reach him at [e-mail] or [phone]

NOT JUST FOR CARS: BIOFUEL HEATS HOMES

NO T JUST FOR CARS: BIOFUEL HEATS HOMES Toasty oil furnaces boast efficiency and staying power — and now they sport more shades of green

From :American Fuels website

By Randi Bjornstad

The Register-Guard

More and more cars on the road are sporting “biodiesel” bumper stickers, touting the “green” sensibilities of their owners. But these days even some houses qualify for that eco-friendly label.

That’s because biodiesel — a mixture of diesel and fuel made of vegetable material such as soy or grass — is gaining cachet not only among homeowners who still use their old-style oil furnaces but also among some who choose the option when shopping for a new heating system.

There are compelling reasons to stick with oil heat, whether traditional diesel or biofuel, its supporters contend. Oil furnaces are said to last far longer than other types — 30 years or more, compared to about 15 years for some other options — and converting to another type of furnace can be expensive enough that the cost isn’t recouped during the life of the system. And the quality of the heat from an oil furnace, its partisans contend, is second to none.

Oil heat enthusiasts insist that their preferred product has gotten an undeserved bad rap in the past, starting with allegations of nose-wrinkling diesel odors, sooty residues, and unsightly — even dangerous — storage tanks.

Michael Schilling, general manager of Automatic Heat in Glenwood, sells and services all kinds of furnaces — straight electric and heat pump, natural gas, oil and geothermal — and he’s clearly an oil fan.

“Oil really gives you that nice, warm air, which comes out of the duct at 140 degrees,” Schilling said. “Gas heat’s only about 98 degrees, so lots of people convert from oil to gas and then think their new furnace isn’t working right. We especially caution older clients that they might not be happy with the change.”

Automatic Heat serves about 2,000 customers with oil furnaces, “and about 85 percent are using biodiesel — it’s pretty much clipping right along,” Schilling said. “We offer our customers a B20 blend of 20 percent biofuel and 80 percent low-sulfur (diesel). We don’t go higher because, like cars, some fuel systems can’t handle more than that without modifications.”

Even at that level, the blend “makes a huge impact on emissions,” he said. Eventually, when heating systems that can run 99 percent biofuel become readily available, “if customers are educated about biofuel, I think they’ll want to change,” he said.

Before Automatic Heat began offering biodiesel heating oil two years ago, “we polled our customers and told them we were considering it,” Schilling said. “At that time, about 70 percent of them said they wanted it, even at premium prices.”

The price of diesel heating oil fluctuates far more than electricity or natural gas, because it’s tied not only to crude oil prices determined largely by the world’s primary oil producers but also by the number of domestic refineries online at any one time and the amount of petroleum they process.

Even so, the cost of heating with oil “is kind of in the middle” of available options, with natural gas “probably cheaper — I hate to say that, but it’s true — and pellets and propane are higher,” said Bill Miller, who oversees heating oil operations for Marshall’s, a longtime heating and cooling company in Springfield.

“We do see some people changing from heating oil to other types of heat, but we are selling some new oil furnaces. They’re up there in efficiency — a higher grade of furnace oil like kerosene is 93 percent efficient,” Miller said. He agrees with Schilling that “it is the warmest heat you can get.”

Schilling estimates that over the long term, “for identical homes, heating with oil is probably less than 5 percent more expensive than natural gas.”

Heat pumps are the least expensive form of heating, “but their efficiency drops rapidly when the outdoor temperature goes down below 35 degrees,” he said. “And straight electric heat is definitely the most expensive way to heat a home.” According to data provided by Molly Brady, spokeswoman for the Oregon Petroleum Association, the average per gallon price this year for heating oil is $2.39, up from $1.17 in 2000 but down from $2.47 a year ago.

The U.S. Department of Energy estimates that, nationally, home heating costs may increase this winter by 21 percent for customers with oil furnaces and 20 percent for households using natural gas. The energy department also projects price increases nationally for electric and propane heating.

Heating oil “is simply off-road diesel,” according to SeQuential Biofuels, one of the major suppliers of biodiesel in both the Eugene and Portland areas. “Any heating oil furnace can use a B20 biodiesel blend without modification,” the company’s Web site says. Blends of up to 99.9 percent biodiesel and 0.1 percent petro-diesel can be used if approved by a certified home heating technician, SeQuential says.

Both Oregon homeowners and drivers who use biodiesel with a rating of B20 or more for home heating or personal vehicles now qualify for tax credits of up to $200 on their state tax returns, under a bill adopted by the 2007 state Legislature.

Brady says there are several reasons why people who have oil furnaces should keep them and those who are furnace shopping should consider them. Heating oil is not smelly, and well-maintained oil furnaces run clean and trouble-free, she said.

In fact, Schilling said, the “soot factor” of properly used oil furnaces is historically low, and even lower when burning newer, lower-sulfur diesel blended with biofuel.

“When we started with biodiesel, we were a little concerned about whether there would be problems with filters and nozzles, but it hasn’t been a problem,” he said. “In some cases, with boiler systems, we found that they were sparkling clean after a year of using biodiesel — it actually improved the systems.”

Nor is it true that people need to convert their heating systems from oil to something else — or get rid of no-longer-used storage tanks — before trying to sell their homes, Brady said.

“Some people think that having a tank full of heating oil is really dangerous, but the truth is that you can drop a match in a bucket of heating oil without any risk of explosion or fire,” Brady said. “Natural gas and propane are far more volatile than heating oil.”

While real estate agents often advise sellers to replace oil furnaces and buyers to beware of purchasing properties with them, according to heating specialists, both Brady and Schilling say neither should be a rule of thumb.

“I have issues with real estate agents who say you can’t sell a house with oil heat, because it is such a good, efficient heat source,” Schilling said. “But once people have that in their mind, convincing them otherwise is pretty difficult, although the biodiesel option has made a difference.”

Younger homeowners especially have become aware of the benefits of “going green” by using biodiesel in existing oil heat systems, Brady said. “Many of them also like being able to choose where they buy their fuel. With electric or natural gas furnaces, there’s usually only one supplier.”

Selling a home with oil heat is no problem if the storage tank has not leaked and the owner knows of no other, underground tanks on the property, according to the state Department of Environmental Quality. Sellers who have converted to another form of heat must certify that any unused tanks on the property are empty.

If the seller does not know whether the property ever had an oil furnace, looking for an oil fill pipe close to the ground or a vent pipe attached to the house may indicate the presence of an abandoned tank.

Iran Disapproves Of Biofuels

Saturday, April 5, 2008

‌American Fuels

Iran Disapproves Of Biofuels

A couple of years back I ran across this article with this quote by a member of OPEC.

"Our competitors, the alternative energy providers, are intensively pursuing research programs aimed at reducing the domination of oil and gas in the global energy market," Abdullah Salatt, Qatar's representative to OPEC, said. "Likewise, we should have our own independent programs."

Ever since then, I have been interested in anything I see coming out of OPEC member states that references biofuels in any way. Today, this article appeared in the Tehran Times, and it had some noteworthy quotes in it.

After the War, oil became cheap in the Middle East causing decline in biofuel production but while the global oil market encountered recession in 1973 and 1979 this created new interest in biofuel production.

I thought that was funny, what we call an embargo they call a recession in the global oil market.

The US will cut its 75% fuel import by 2025 through biofuel production.

Wish that were true. They seem to be a little off on, well, most of their numbers.

Environmental and human rights organizations in different countries have voiced protests against biofuel production affecting food security. Similar protests are being echoed also in Bangladesh. With the conscious global society we may also have to realize that biofuel production is a 'crime committed against humanity'. And with the global conscience, we may also have to stay alert and vigilant against it.

Being an oil exporting country, their dislike for biofuels is understandable. But to pull together pieces of misinformation and cherry picked facts so that they can appear to represent the voice of the global conscience is laughable.