The State of Cellulosic Biomass

1
The State of Cellulosic Biomass Biofuels
Industry

• Stephen S. Kelley
• Wood and Paper Science
• North Carolina State University

2
Biomass Share of U.S. Energy Supply (data for
2006)
3
US Energy Flows
4

• Summary of Conversion Technology
• Technology challenges
• Costs barriers
• Process Options
• Conversion to ethanol new plant vs. repurposed
  mill
• Hemicelluloses extraction production of pulp or
  power
• Gasification to biofuels and CHP
• Pyrolysis oil into petroleum refining

5
Technical Barriers to Total Conversion
6
Total Conversion New Facility

• Improved enzymes higher efficiency, lower cost
• Fermentation of mixed sugars C-6 vs. C-5
  simultaneously or sequentially
• Consistent feedstock quality/product yields
• Capital costs of 200-350 million

7
Lignocellulose Cost by Unit Operation
(after 10x cost reduction!)
30-40 of Capital
8
Total Conversion of Wood Feedstocks Repurposed
mill

• Improved enzymes higher efficiency, lower cost,
  but potential for recycle with clear pulp
• Fermentation of mixed sugars C-6 vs. C-5
  simultaneously or sequentially
• Consistent wood feedstock
• Lower capital costs 100-150 million ??

9

• Summary of Conversion Technology
• Technology challenges
• Costs barriers
• Process Options
• Conversion to ethanol new plant vs. repurposed
  mill
• Hemicelluloses extraction production of pulp or
  power
• Gasification to biofuels and CHP
• Pyrolysis oil into petroleum refining

10
Hemicelluloses ExtractionPulp production (VPP)
150 MM tons/year65 Hardwood 35 Softwood
50 Hemicelluloses Recovered
100 Oligomers Fermented
70 Theoretical Ethanol Yield
1,600 MM gal/yr10.7 gal/ton wood
11
Hemicelluloses Extraction from Wood Pulp
production

• No need for cellulase enzymes
• Fermentation of mixed sugars C-6 vs. C-5
  simultaneously or sequentially
• Trade-off between pulp/paper quality and
  hemicelluose/ethanol yield
• This is a small ethanol plant, 10-20 million
  gallons

12
Hemicelluloses Extraction Power production

• No need for cellulase enzymes
• Fermentation of mixed sugars C-6 vs. C-5
  simultaneously or sequentially
• Higher yield of hemis (more hemis) and higher
  BTU per OD pounds of remaining feedstock than
  with VPP
• Applicable to lower cost, variable feedstocks
• Lower value product (pulp vs. electricity)
• Large percentage of capital in place

13

• Summary of Conversion Technology
• Technology challenges
• Costs barriers
• Process Options
• Conversion to ethanol new plant vs. repurposed
  mill
• Hemicelluloses extraction production of pulp or
  power
• Gasification to biofuels and CHP
• Pyrolysis oil into petroleum refining

14
Biomass Gasification
15
Coal Gasification Plant Eastman Chemicals,
Kingsport TN
16
Products from Syngas
17

• Biomass Gasification
• Similar coal and natural gas systems are 50-150
  times larger on a Btu basis
• Several successful woody biomass systems in
  service, limited materials issues
• Much less sensitive to biomass feedstock quality
• Tar removal/destruction to provide clean syngas
  (catalysts), several options for process
  integration
• Scale and capital are major issues to get
  reasonable economics

18

• Summary of Conversion Technology
• Technology challenges
• Costs barriers
• Process Options
• Conversion to ethanol new plant vs. repurposed
  mill
• Hemicelluloses extraction production of pulp or
  power
• Gasification to biofuels and CHP
• Pyrolysis oil into petroleum refining

19
Biomass Pyrolysis Oil Production
20

• Biomass Pyrolysis and Upgrading
• Several successful woody biomass systems in
  service at 200-500 tpd
• Relatively insensitive to biomass feedstock
  quality bark is an advantage
• Requires hydrogen lose all of the oxygen and
  potentially some carbon
• Long-term performance of hydrocracking catalysts
  
• Scale and capital are major issues to get
  reasonable economics

21
Torrefaction Adding Value and Reducing
Transportation Cost/BTU

• Woody Biomass is
• Bulky
• Moist
• Fibrous
• Perishable
• Waste
• Expensive to transport

• Torrefied Wood (TW) is
• Dense (if pelletized)
• Dry, water resistant
• Easily crushed
• Does not rot
• Valuable Fuel
• Energy Dense

22
Torrefaction Process Conceptual Schematic
23
Potential Impact in North Carolina

• Coal power use in North Carolina (EIA, 2005) is
  about 35 million tons, or a 4 billion market at
  current prices.
• North Carolina currently generates about 8
  million green tons of logging residue annually
  (TPO, 2005), or potentially 2.8 million tons of
  torrefied wood substitutable for coal.
• We estimate torrefied wood will be cost
  competitive with 80/ton coal purely on an energy
  basis.
• Non energy benefits of torrefied wood over coal
• Low sulfur, mercury
• Carbon neutral
• Locally derived, economic development fuel
• Shorter transportation chain, lower fossil fuel
  use

24

• Summary
• There is enough biomass to make a national
  impact
• Biomass fuels and products can be made
  sustainable wood is more consistent, harder via
  Biochem, easier with Thermochem
• There are still technical hurdles but also
  significant progress, capital risk is still the
  largest element of risk
• Total conversion of lignocelluloses biomass to
  ethanol will be demonstrated in the 6 DOE
  co-funded projects more than 1 billion total
  investment with 365 million from DOE
• Low risk options for redeploying current assets
  repurposing pulp mills for demonstration of
  technology is very promising
• Very limited, if any, competition for feedstocks
  at the national scale for the next 5-10 years

25
QUESTIONS?
26
Mixed Waste Focus BlueFire Ethanol, Inc.
investors/participants include Waste Management,
Inc. JGC Corporation MECS Inc. NAES and
PetroDiamond. DOE - 40 million Private - 60
million The proposed plant will be in Southern
California.  The plant will use strong acid
hydrolysis and fermentation, and will be sited on
an existing landfill and produce about 90 million
gallons of ethanol a year. It will use sorted
green waste and wood waste from
landfills. Target - 63 gal/ton
27
Agricultural Waste Focus Broin Companies (now
POET) participants include E. I. du Pont de
Nemours and Company Novozymes North America,
Inc. and DOEs National Renewable Energy
Laboratory. DOE - 80 million Private 120
million The plant is in Emmetsburg, Iowa. The
plant will use enzyme hydrolysis and fermentation
to 35 million gallons of ethanol per year. For
feedstock in the production of cellulosic
ethanol, the plant expects to use 842 tons per
day of corn fiber, cobs, and stalks. Target 83
gal/ton
28
Agricultural Waste Focus Iogen Biorefinery
Partners, LLC investors/partners include Iogen
Corporation Goldman Sachs and The Royal
Dutch/Shell Group. DOE - 80 million Private
120 million The proposed plant will be built in
Shelley, Idaho, near Idaho Falls. The plant will
use enzyme hydrolysis and fermentation to produce
250 million annual gallons.  The plant will use
700 tons per day of agricultural residues
including wheat straw, barley straw, corn stover,
or switchgrassas feedstocks. Target - 71 gal/ton
29
Agricultural Waste Focus Abengoa Bioenergy
Biomass investors/participants include Abengoa
Bioenergy RD, Inc. Abengoa Engineering and
Construction, LLC Antares Corp. and Taylor
Engineering (DOE - 76 million Private 110
million. The proposed plant will be located in
the state of Kansas.  The plant will use
gasification to produce 11.4 million gallons of
ethanol annually and enough energy to power the
facility, with any excess energy being used
to power the adjacent corn dry grind mill.  The
plant will use 700 tons per day of corn stover,
wheat straw, milo stubble, switchgrass, and other
feedstocks. Target 79 gal/ton
30
Wood Feedstocks Focus ALICO, Inc.
investors/participants include Bioengineering
Resources, Inc. of Fayetteville, Arkansas
Washington Group International of Boise, Idaho
GeoSyntec Consultants of Boca Raton, Florida BG
Katz Companies/JAKS, LLC of Parkland, Florida
and Emmaus Foundation, Inc. DOE - 76 million
Private 114 million The proposed plant will
be in LaBelle, Florida.  Using gasification and
catalysts technology the plant will produce 20.9
million gallons of ethanol a year and 6,255
kilowatts of electric power, as well as 8.8 tons
of hydrogen and 50 tons of ammonia per day.  For
feedstock, the plant will use 770 tons per day of
yard, wood, and vegetative wastes and eventually
energy cane. Target 75 gal/ton plus ammonia,
hydrogen and power
31
Wood Feedstocks Focus Range Fuels
investors/participants include Merrick and
Company PRAJ Industries Ltd. Western Research
Institute Georgia Forestry Commission Yeomans
Wood and Timber Truetlen County Development
Authority BioConversion Technology Khosla
Ventures CH2MHill Gillis Ag and Timber. DOE -
76 million private - 150 million The proposed
plant will be constructed in Soperton, Georgia. 
The plant will use gasification and catalysts to
produce about 40 million gallons of ethanol per
year and 9 million gallons per year of methanol. 
As feedstock, the plant will use 1,200 tons per
day of wood residues and wood based energy
crops. Target 113 gal/ton
32

• EU Projects
• Chemrec and Volvo
• High pressure gasification of spent liquor from
  pulp mill to produce dimethyl ether (DME).
• DME requires a specific diesel engine Volvo
  heavy trucks in building the engine.
• Pulp mills can produce 30 of Finlands and 50
  of Swedens liquid fuels.
• Gasifier has more than 3,000 hours on stream at
  500 ton/day.
• Gas to liquids plant under construction
• CHOREN and Daimler Chrysler
• Gasification and GTL to make FTL, refined into
  standard diesel fuel
• The ultra-low sulfur diesel can be used by any
  current diesel engine.
• Beta plant including gasification and GTL
  completed this month (200 tpd)
• Full scale plant under design (3,000 tpd)