Status of Bioenergy Technology in California

California Biomass Collaborative 6th Annual Forum12 May 2009Sacramento, California

Bryan M. Jenkins, Director, UC Davis Energy InstituteProfessor, Department of Biological and Agricultural EngineeringUniversity of California, Davis

…I saw the riches of the earth crumble before picks and taken away by shovel. It came to me that presently, as with all other things, those riches would have an end. The money would not be paid, for there would be none for master or man. The pick and shovel would rust. The collieries would be left to flood-water and rats. The men would go. The houses would empty…The grass would try to cover all, out of pity.

And I was afraid.…Richard Llewellyn

How Green Was My Valley (1940)

DisclaimerAny errors are my own.

Feedstock complexity allows for diversity of products and conversion strategies

Crude Biomass

Moisture Dry Matter(Total Solids)

StructuralComponents

Lignin

Cellulose

Hemicellulose

Extractives

Ash (Inorganic)

Proteins

Simple Sugars

Lipids/Oils

AdventitiousMaterial (e.g. soil)

Other Minerals

Metals

Elemental Composition

PhysicalAnd

ChemicalProperties

Volatile Matter

Volatile Solids

Fixed Carbon

Salts

Biomass Conversion Pathways• Conversion

– Thermochemical• Combustion• Gasification• Pyrolysis

– Biochemical• Anaerobic/Fermentation• Aerobic Processing• Biophotolysis

– Physicochemical• Esterification• Alkanes

• Final Demand– Energy

• Heat• Electricity

– Fuels• Solids• Liquids• Gases

– Products• Chemicals• Materials

• Biomass– Agricultural– Forest– Urban– Energy Crops

• Cereals• SRWC• Oilseeds• Sugar

crops• Forages• Grasses• Algae• …

Integrated Biorefinery Concept

Source: US Department of Energy

0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000

Miles per dry ton of biomass

Electricity (35% efficiency/IGCC/Cofiring)

Electricity (25% efficiency/current)

BTL-Syndiesel

Ethanol

Ethanol

(63 gals/ton)

Miles per dry ton biomass

(110 gals/ton)

(80 gals/ton)

Hydrogen Fuel Cell (62 kg/ton)

Is there a definitive conversion technology for biomass?

Transport range for bioenergy

Jenkins, 2005

Science, 8 May 2009

Bioenergy in California

• Electricity• Steam/heat• Ethanol/Mixed Alcohols• Biodiesel• Landfill gas/Digester gas/Biomethane• Syngas/Producer gas• Bioenergy crops/resources

California Biomass Power Facilities

Electricity

Progress toward RPS

CPUC, Q1 RPS Progress Report, 2009

Solid-fuel biomass combustion• 33 biomass facilities operational

– 3 additional solid waste facilities• 4 restarts• approximately 600 MWe• Issues:

– Financing– Energy purchase price/contract provisions– Emission offsets– Fuel cost– Renewable fuel definitions

• Forest lands• Urban fuels

– PTC– Emission/GHG reduction credits

Expansion/Repowering• New technologies

– IGCC, fuel cells• Co-firing

– Efficiency advantages in large fossil-based generators• Expansion

– Create emission offsets to allow facility capacity increase• Demand-following

– Seasonal, daily peaking• Integration

– Biorefineries, co-location– Statutory definitions?

Distributed thermal power systems

• Several demonstration or semi-commercial operating or in start-up

• Policy/Contract effects– Feed-in tariff

• Capacity cap– Rule 21/Net metering

• Lack of equity in existing law

– Departed load/demand charges

– Green attributes/RECs

Dairy Biogas/Biomethane

Courtesy N. Drake, B&N Enterprises

• 12 operational– approximately half operating

• Project types– Electricity– Pipeline injection– Vehicle fuel

Dairy Digesters• Air emissions for IC engines

– San Joaquin Valley• Older engines replaced with newer lean burn engines

to meet rule limit at 150 ppm• New engines need to meet BACT: 0.15 g/bhph (9 - 11 ppm) NOx• BACT: achieved in practice and technologically feasible

– Microturbines with controls considered cost effective» Food processor with biogas microturbine currently reported to be

below BACT limit– Fuel cells not yet considered cost effective– Some systems achieving BACT using ICE with H2S scrubbers and

catalytic after-treatment» 3-way catalyst for rich-burn» SCR for lean-burn» Additional systems (e.g. Noxtech NSCR)

• At least 3 systems under variance from district– 2 operating, 1 start-up – Air-fuel excursions with rich-burn engine causing exceedances in NOx– Experimental systems

» adjustment if cannot meet BACT• Uncertainty high

Corn price Ethanol price

Corn price Ethanol price

Corn price Ethanol price

Corn price Ethanol price

http://www.pacificethanol.net/site/index.php/facilities/facilities_article/106/

Alcohols• Corn-ethanol facility operations suspended• Estimated GHG emission reductions (16%) below the 20%

required under EISA/RFS2 estimates• Cellulosic-ethanol still pre-commercial

– Authority to Construct air permit for Lancaster 3.7 MGY facility

• 4 of 6 large-scale cellulosic-ethanoldemonstrations continuing– Increased DOE support pending

• Other pilot and research projects http://www.rangefuels.com/our-optimization-plant.html

DOE Cellulosic Biorefinery Demonstration Project Awards, 2007-2010, $385M (initial)Awarded to

Ethanol Capacity(MGY) Technology Feedstock

(tpd=tons per day)Location

Award($ Milliion)

Abengoa 11.4 (cellulosic)85 (starch)

+ power and syngas

Enzymatic hydrolysis +

biomass gasification for process energy

700 tpd corn stover, wheat straw, switchgrass,

others

Kansas 76

ALICO 13.9+ power, 8 tpd

hydrogen, 50 tpd ammonia

Gasification followed by syngas

fermentation(BRI)

770 tpd greenwaste and energycane

Florida 33

BlueFire Ethanol

19 Concentrated acid hydrolysis

(Arkenol process)

700 tpd sorted greenwaste and wood

waste from landfill

California 40

POET (Broin) 31 cellulosic94 starch

engineered Zymomonas bacteria

(Dupont)

842 tpd corn fiber, cobs, stalks

Iowa 80

Iogen Biorefinery Partners

18 Enzymatic hydrolysis(Iogen)

700 tpd wheat and rice straw, other ag. residues,

switchgrass

Idaho 80

Range Fuels 40+ 9 methanol

Gasification followed by catalytic

syngas upgrading

1,200 tpd wood residues and energy wood

Georgia 76

WITHDRAWNWITHDRAWNWITHDRAWN

WITHDRAWNWITHDRAWNWITHDRAWN

EPA Proposed Rulemaking: RFS25 May 2009

Cellulosic biofuel 0.06%

Biomass-based diesel 0.71%

Advanced biofuel 0.59%

Proposed Standards for 2010

“Based on information from the industry, we believe that there are sufficient plans underway to build plants capable of producing 0.1 billion gallons of cellulosic biofuel in 2010, the minimum volume of cellulosic biofuel required by EISA for 2010.”

“However, we recognize that cellulosic biofuel is at the very earliest stages of commercialization and current economic concerns could have significant impacts on these near term plans. Therefore, while based on industry plans available to EPA, we are not proposing that any portion of the cellulosic biofuel requirement for 2010 be waived, we are seeking additional and updated information that would be available prior to November 30, 2009 which could result in a change in this conclusion.”

0.1

0.65

0.95

Billion Gallons (2010)

12.95 Total RFSRenewable Fuel 8.01%

-140

-120

-100

-80

-60

-40

-20

0

20

Cor

n Et

hano

l Dry

Mill

NG

Cor

n Et

hano

l Bes

t Cas

e D

ry M

ill N

G

Cor

n Et

hano

l Dry

Mill

Coa

l

Cor

n Et

hano

l Dry

Mill

Bio

mas

s

Suga

rcan

e Et

hano

l

Switc

hgra

ss E

than

ol

Cor

n St

over

Eth

anol

Soyb

ean

Bio

dies

el

Was

te G

reas

e B

iodi

esel

Perc

ent I

ncre

ase

(Red

uctio

n)EPA RFS2 Lifecycle GHG reductions

Required:

Renewable fuel

Biodiesel/ (Cellulosic)Cellulosic fuels

(NG corn)

100 year/2% discount

California LCFS

Los Angeles Times, 22 April 2009

California Air Resources Board Resolution 09-3123 April 2009

Whereas,…

…

…

…

Biodiesel

• 100 year/2% discounted EPA RFS2 soydiesel GHG emission reduction only 22% – below the 50% required

• Biomass-based diesel (EISA/RFS1/RFS2)– Made from renewable biomass– 50% lower GHG emissions than gasoline or diesel

displaced– RFS2 revises co-processing with petroleum restriction

in EISA/RFS1• Serial co-processing/blending allowed• Only renewable fuel volume counted

-140

-120

-100

-80

-60

-40

-20

0

20

Cor

n Et

hano

l Dry

Mill

NG

Cor

n Et

hano

l Bes

t Cas

e D

ry M

ill N

G

Cor

n Et

hano

l Dry

Mill

Coa

l

Cor

n Et

hano

l Dry

Mill

Bio

mas

s

Suga

rcan

e Et

hano

l

Switc

hgra

ss E

than

ol

Cor

n St

over

Eth

anol

Soyb

ean

Bio

dies

el

Was

te G

reas

e B

iodi

esel

Perc

ent I

ncre

ase

(Red

uctio

n)

Biodiesel/ (Cellulosic)

Jurisdiction of the State

Conversion System

Emissions

Products

Waste

Resources

Biorefinery optimization modeling

LCE = Lignocellulosic ethanol. LCMD = Lignocellulosic middle distillates (FT diesel). BP = direct combustion for electricity (biopower). CHP = combined heat and power. FAME = fatty acid methyl ester. FAHC = hydrotreated lipids (hydrocarbons). GE = grain ethanol.

Feedstock Category Feedstock Type Conversion

Technologies

Clean Lignocellulosics

Forest biomass Straw, Stover, and Vegetable Ag. Residues Dry food processing wastes Orchard/Vineyard Wastes Municipal Solid Wastes (MSW)

• Clean Mixed Paper

• Clean Wood Wastes

• Clean Yard Wastes

LCE LCMD BP CHP

Lignocellulosics Remainder of Biomass MSW, Remainder from sorting

LCE LCMD BP CHP

Lipids Yellow Grease Animal Fats

FAME FAHC

Grains Corn Dry Mill Ethanol

Conclusions• Technology improvements realized in all

bioenergy sectors• Supply objectives still in many cases based on

pre-commercial and uncertain technology outcomes, incentives with market opportunities have encouraged innovation

• Regulatory, interconnection, and other integration issues remain, awareness of issues improving, jurisdiction of the state needs to be carefully considered in relation to flexibility of future technological development.