Dallas Texas Ethanol Terminal

Within the debate over the pros and cons of ethanol, a lot of thought has to go into its transportation. Because of the phase separation that occurs with ethanol in gasoline, the possibility occurs for it to mix with small amounts of water in a gasoline pipeline and carry particulate matter. This is undesired and has eliminated the possibility of transporting ethanol through conventional gasoline pipelines. On the plus side, this has led to a railroad renaissance and produced talk of expanding rail capacity or upgrading existing lines to meet the need for transport. May 28th will see a huge step in upgrading the nation's rail systems due to ethanol's effect. Texas, and particularly the Dallas-Fort Worth area, is a huge potential market for ethanol. Providing cheap and efficient transport into that area would be a huge benefit to Midwest ethanol plants and a good way to jump-start ethanol usage in the South while cellulosic technologies come online in the area. US Development Group, in alliance with Union Pacific, has built a state of the art ethanol terminal in the Dallas area, set to open May 28th, which will be a major jumping off point for ethanol to end up in that city or to be trucked to other major areas in the state.
The company indicates that this state-of-the-art terminal was built specifically so that ethanol trains would not add any congestion to existing rail lines. Also, the terminal is capable of quickly offloading an 84-car unit train of ethanol with dedicated pipelines to truck terminals that will allow for quick and easy distribution of the fuel to gas stations. In recent weeks with the astronomical rise of first crude oil and now gasoline, and the relatively flat price increases in ethanol, blending 10% ethanol into gasoline will not only be a huge windfall for gasoline blenders but hopefully also for consumers. This is because since so much ethanol currently exists, the price per gallon is nearly a dollar cheaper than gasoline. Once blending occurs, retailers should offer at least 10 to 15 cents per gallon off of a gallon of E10 gasoline to offset the energy density decrease in ethanol and because their fuel is at least that much cheaper to produce.
With this efficient connection to the South the United States will see a much more widespread use of ethanol. With it will come more people enjoying the fuel but also a renewed need to work quickly to solve some of the problems that exist in the ethanol process before the fuel becomes more widespread and produced in higher quantities.

Ethanol Facts

Instead of a news article, I thought I'd educate a little bit on some of the facts of ethanol in the United States as it currently stands for corn-based ethanol:



1) One bushel of corn produces 2.8 gallons of ethanol and 17-18 pounds of DDGS (dried distillers grains).



2) One acre of corn produces approx. 500 gallons of ethanol -- enough to fuel six cars for a year on E10.



3) As of 2006, approximately 30% of all motor fuels in the US had some ethanol blended into it.



4) Argonne National Laboratory concluded a study last year that found ethanol reduces greenhouse gases 35% - 46% over gasoline derived fuels.



5) Every 100 BTUs (British Thermal Units) of energy used to produce ethanol becomes 167 BTUs of energy in the form of ethanol.
(The reason this can occur is that the light energy gained from the sun during the growth of the plant is not included in the calculation -- an ethanol plant is approximately 38% efficient in recovering chemical energy).

6) Although an ethanol plant may be 38% efficient, our power plants generate electricity at an amazing 30% efficiency.

7) The United States is composed of 1.9 billion acres of land; 450 million is categorized as crop land and 580 million acres is pasture.

8) Hardware needed to make a vehicle into a flex-fuel capable car is $100-$200.

9) As of 2006 there were 4-5 million E85 capable cars in the United States (which is 2-3% of US car fleet).

10) An E85 blend of gasoline will decrease VOCs (volatile organic compounds) by 15%, carbon monoxide by 40%, nitrous oxide by 10%, and sulfate emissions by 80%. All of these compounds are greenhouse gases or smog related compounds. (This information from the Oklahoma Department of Environmental Quality).

Sources:

http://www.iowacorn.org/ethanol/ethanol_3a.html

http://www.energycommission.org/files/finalReport/IV.4.c%20-%20Cellulosic%20Ethanol%20Fact%20Sheet.pdf

http://www.deq.state.ok.us/factsheets/air/ethanolfs.pdf

Zymetis

In what could become a huge advance for near-term cellulosic ethanol production goals, two professors from the University of Maryland are offering their solution to the issue of how to extract the sugars needed to make ethanol from cellulosic material. The claim is that a bacteria, isolated in marsh land near the Chesapeake Bay and names Sacharophagus degradans, is able to degrade cellulosic and chitinous materials such as corn stover, newspapers, or crab exoskeletons. The result is a fluid rich in sugars used by the yeast to produce ethanol. This advance would mean that conversion of simple-cellulosic feedstocks would be possible at a relatively low cost. The two professors have already started a company known as Zymetis to bring this conversion technology to market by the end of the year.
This is very good news and a great step in the right direction. Before celebrating, however, it would be nice to see some of the data on this microbe. First, it is hard to say how quickly the bug is able to break down the cellulosic material -- if it takes weeks such to break down some old newspaper then the costs saved using trash might be negated by the much larger tanks needed to digest the material in. Second, it is hard to say what the bacteria is converting the cellulose into -- for example, if it turns it all into glucose then yeast will love this bacteria like a PB&J. However, if it produces xylose or a glucose derivative that yeast are less efficient at converting to ethanol then there may be a problem. Finally, it is hard to say how much of the corn stover or newspaper can be degraded. In other words, if only half is being broken down then you will have a large slurry mess to deal with afterwords.
This technology is separate also from a more mid to long term technology known as gasification/ethanol production. Although gasification is said to be used in Coskata/GM's ethanol production schemes, this technology will be available in 2010 at the very earliest and there are still several problems to work out of the system between now and then. The benefits in gasification, if it can be engineered to work, is that cellulosic/chitinous material would not be the only materials utilized in such a system. Unlike Zymetis' method, gasification would allow the use of all material including lignin, which is seen in high proportions in woody plants.
Either way, the benefits of Zymetis' technology are that it will continue to bridge the gap between corn-based ethanol and cellulosic ethanol, which will hopefully take pressure off using only grain-based plant material in ethanol production and might serve to incorporate more cellulosic feedstocks such as switchgrass or trash that promise to make ethanol even more attractable because of lower GHG emissions.

For more info:
http://www.greencarcongress.com/2008/03/new-enzyme-comp.html#more

Hydrogen Powered Cars

Sorry for the intermittent postings going on lately, midterms took up a lot of my time. But, I'm back now, full throttle and have got lots to talk about. First is a press release from GM and Toyota that came out at the Geneva Auto Show stating that both companies feel that fuel cell technology (hydrogen) to power cars is not going to happen at all in the recent future and both companies are steering away from R&D in that sector. Both executives feel that the current technology that allows fuel cells to be produced is way too expensive for consumers and would be cost prohibitive. Instead, GM and Toyota are focusing on flex-fuel vehicles and hybrids in the near term and PHEV (plug-in electric vehicles) as a possible long term option after more research is concluded. Interestingly, Toyota and the rest of the hybrid producing companies saw a dip in hybrid sales for the month of February to 22,000 units sold. This is a year-on-year drop but could be a result of a sluggish economy in the United States as light-duty vehicles as a whole dropped nearly 6%, while the hybrid drop is closer to 2%.
With Toyota and GM's announcement, I think automakers and researchers should move away from fuel-cell technology research and focus on integrating hybrid and flex-fuel technology as seen in the Saab turbocharge vehicle that was referenced in an earlier post.

E20 Blends

Research released today from the University of Minnesota has indicated that blends of 20% ethanol (E20) has no detrimental effect on performance or maintenance of cars and is safe to use in non flex-fuel capable cars. The tests were done on 40 models of cars over a 1 year period that tested performance and wear on components of the engine prone to problems in high-ethanol blended gasoline when used in non flex-fuel engines. The same group is still working on tailpipe emissions and fuel economy studies from these cars to see if they duplicate an earlier study by South Dakota State University that found blends of E20 or E30 actually increased mileage in non flex-fuel cars even with the decreased energy density in ethanol.
The key to this study from the U of Minnesota is that E20 seems to be safe for cars. Minnesota as a state has mandated that 20% of its gasoline be composed of ethanol by 2013, whether the blend comes from using E10 and E85 or from using E20 in all gasoline. However, in other states and particularly in order to get the whole nation on board, I think the big automakers such as Ford and GM should conduct the same tests on each of their new models. Once they get the results, they should sign off on each new car produced and include the warranty up to E20. Until they do this, I fear that the U of Minnesota will be nothing more than an interesting read for those that might have the courage and ability to put E20 in their tanks. Over the past few hours the internet sites devoted to ethanol have been full of comments saying that Minnesota studying E20 feasibility is foolish since much of the nation is not exposed even to E10. I disagree. I think that in the Midwest, going to E20 when we know it is a safe fuel for current non flex-fuel vehicles will allow more of the region to use the ethanol produced in our backyard and reduce the strain on transportation that the industry is experiencing. If Minnesota wants to go E20, this study has said that it is safe and I say more power to them. Hopefully more research will go into this aspect of the ethanol debate so that more states can join with Minnesota to encourage the usage of this environmentally friendly, domestic fuel.

Here is a link to a summary of the Minnesota report:
http://www.ethanolrfa.org/objects/documents/1559/state_of_mn_e20_executive_summary.pdf

My Dream Car

I mentioned this before but I'm just so glad to see these things come to reality. While the energy debate lately has taken a turn for the worst -- i.e. people adopt tunnel vision and think that ethanol, hybrid, and hydrogen transportation fuels are mutually exclusive -- Saab and GM are bringing the debate back on track. Saab released its new concept car at the Geneva Motor Show, the Saab 9-X Biohybrid, which is a continuation on its biopower line of cars. The 9-X uses a turbocharged engine to downsize the engine and reduce the weight of the car, while utilizing the ethanol-capable systems and a sophisticated computer to correctly time the direct injection of fuel and allow the reduction of knock in the smaller engine. The result is a small engine that is equivalently powerful to engines much larger, (200hp and 207 lb-ft of torque), that reduces tail-pipe emissions when run on E85, (117 grams of CO2 per kilometer versus 105 g CO2/km on E85). Keep in mind that the previous numbers are tailpipe emissions, where the benefit of E85 is usually not seen -- ethanol's GHG emissions benefit is seen in the fact that the carbon emitted is the same as the carbon trapped during the previous year's growing season.

Although the car is completely flex-fuel so that any proportion of ethanol/gasoline can be used, the mileage is less when running on E85. The engine gets 48mpg on gasoline and 37mpg on E85, however the gasoline fueled engine does not perform as well as the ethanol fueled engine. The cherry that tops off this desert is the fact that GM and Saab didn't stop there -- they installed a state-of-the-art hybrid system to combine the flex-fuel, turbocharged awesomeness with the added benefits of the hybrid technology. This is exactly the kind of innovative technology that is needed to put a dent in oil consumption and GHG emissions. With these two systems combined, car performance doesn't need to be sacrificed (like we see in those stupid European one-seater cars that look barely safer than driving one of my old micro machines on the interstate), and the gasoline displacement would be significant. Not to mention the amazingly high fuel economy even while running on ethanol and it is definitely a car for the next generation.

This type of car is still a few years off but the ideas are great. GM and Saab added that they aren't stopping at this concept car -- turbo downsizing, cooled EGR, and cam phasing are all indicated as techniques to lower emissions and raise mileage in the ethanol fueled car. This could lead to a truly E85 car that boasts lower emissions and increased mileage over gasoline. All-in-all, this type of story should be a huge boost of confidence for the innovation that will be coming down the pipeline in the next few years.

Here is a picture of the car:

http://www.greencarcongress.com/2008/03/gm-introduces-s.html#more

Next Generation Biofuels

The NSF (National Science Foundation) in conjunction with the DOE has unveiled what it believes is the roadmap to hydrocarbon biofuels production. Hydrocarbons are chains of carbon with hydrogens attached and you might commonly know these mixtures as gasoline, diesel, or jet fuel. Science and scientists have been unable to bridge the gap between plants and gasoline production on a large scale like what they've done with ethanol. NSF hasn't answered the problem, but it lays out in a concise form how hydrocarbons could be produced using biological and engineering techniques, (some of which they anticipate the pathways being elucidated or refined in order to maximize production ability). This announcement is good news for scientists, such as myself, who are already looking into the problem as it signals a new round of interest, and possibly funding, for projects dealing with next-generation biofuels. This is not to say that the age of ethanol is over, far from it, this is merely the gearing up of what might amount to several years of research to hopefully uncover the answer. What NSF provides is an umbrella of support to bring scientists and engineers together to solve a problem that will probably take a little of both.

Here is a layout of what they see as a "Roadmap to Hydrocarbon Biofuels Production"

For the full article, follow the link below:

http://www.greencarcongress.com/2008/02/nsf-publishes-r.html#more