>FW: BIOX processHere is the follow up to my initial query. > >Bill C.
Thanks for this Bill. More of the same, eh? Confused and contradictory. What do these alleged low costs depend on? "... our cost of production is approximately 1/3 of other biodiesel process", but also profitability depends on low-cost feedstock. Why? - because only Biox can process such feedstock, allegedly? Anyway, what is it, low cost of production or low cost of feedstock? Or both? Or neither? What are these low costs of production? Their website says 8c/litre of oil, as opposed to other processes which "vary from $0.25 to $0.30/litre". Okay, so that's a third, as claimed. But elsewhere they put their costs at $0.18 cents a litre, and yet elsewhere at "about 7 cents a litre", and also "at a cost of 15-20 cents/litre". "Our nearest competitor is 35 cents a litre for the production of biodiesel. We are 7.5 cents a litre for the energy and chemicals for producing biodiesel" - Tim Haig, Biox. The $0.25 to $0.30 or 35c/litre or whatever cost claimed for other processes won't stand very close examination either. Is Biox's process cheaper? I doubt it. Why do they see the key market lying in blends? The only rationale for the blends is that biodiesel is more expensive than petro-diesel. B20 is said to be the most economical route to the environmental benefits of biodiesel - ONLY because biodiesel is more expensive. All tests show that the benefits of B100 are much greater than those of B20, with an 80% carbon emissions reduction for starters. Biox claims repeatedly that their costs make their product - and only theirs - competitive with petro-diesel. So what's with the blends? Are they claiming that lack of availability is the true reason for the blends? "These gov't mandates alone will require over 16 billion gallons annually in the US by the year 2020." That's not a convincing argument. There was a 40-fold biodiesel production increase in the US between 1999 and 2001, of B100, note, from half a million gallons to 20 million gallons. 16 billion gallons by 2020 is easily attainable. That figure posits current rates of growth in energy use, which is not what's going to happen, while the true potential of biodiesel production has hardly yet been thought of - what is thought of is thought by agribusiness interests, not energy people, and it's very limited thinking indeed. Even in terms of this limited thinking, the DOE proposes six billion gallons by 2020. Anyway, at least Biox does express some interest in actual production instead of just selling the magic box, even if it's an indirect interest. Or is it? What exactly does this mean? >However, I will explain that we intend to lease the plants to the >end user and charge a royalty on all throughput. Ant potential >partner will be expected to give a covenant satisfactory to BIOX to >guarantee the value of the lease. Throughput? That doesn't quite mean production, does it? What does it mean? What does covenant mean? Does it mean that you guarantee a certain production by means of a cash payment to Biox, and Siemens and you are left holding the baby? "Unfortunately, we won't discuss the cost of a plant prior to the execution of our Non-Disclosure Agreement." Costs: $15 million (Canadian, US$9.6 million) for the Ontario pilot plant, according to CEO Tim Haig, claimed capacity 65 million litres, 17 million US gallons. Supposed to be in full production early summer 2002. Is it in production? Why would you need a non-disclosure agreement if you have a patent? In fact they don't have a patent. Glenn Ellis said recently: > The process, nevertheless, appears unique enough to merit > claims that the USPTO recognizes as patentable. Not so. Ed Beggs previously said this: "That is the part for which patents are being sought (at the time of the discussion) and thus the information is not disclosed." After more than four years since Boocock first developed his process, it's still patent-pending, and that's what it says on their website. At least they got that bit right. Boocock announced his process in the NBB bulletin of June 1998, and filed a patent application more than two years later, in August 2000 - two years ago, and the patent has not yet been granted. This below has been linked from our website for some time, an interesting paper by William W. Christie of the Scottish Crop Research Institute, published in 1990. http://www.lipid.co.uk/infores/topics/methests/ Methylation of fatty acids Check it out. Especially check out the bit about tetrahydrofuran (THF), Biox's co-solvent (also MTBE). Methinks there's maybe not much to patent. According to Dow, who make the stuff, by the way, THF is inclined to degrade, forming peroxides, and can explode when mixed with sodium hydroxide. Another point. Boocock, in his response to Erik, talked of the ASTM biodiesel standard, saying homebrewers can't meet it. That's BS, but if you have a close look, he didn't say that Biox could meet it either. Biox also sneers at other commercial producers about standards: "Or they use a chemical method that does not achieve ASTM standard Biodiesel in a one pass cost-effective manner." Todd called this a "minor illusionary pitch" (ie BS), and doubted that "unwashed fuel from the HTP Biox acid/base process falls within ASTM and/or DIN specs". But Biox doesn't claim that it does meet the standards. This is what they claim: "This two-step process successfully converts the fatty acids and triglycerides successfully [sic] achieving ASTM specifications D6751 with regards to total glycerine content." And: "The BIOX Process pilot plant is achieving ASTM's specification PS121-99 with respect to total glycerine content." They only claim that it meets ONE of the standard specifications, for only one type of glycerine contaminant. That's ridiculous. What seems clear is that there's nothing here of interest to small-scale producers, neither threat nor promise. As for would-be large-scale producers, if you want a truly advanced plant that will do exactly what's claimed of it, talk to Energea. Their production cost is about 10c to 12c/litre (Canadian, 7 to 8c US). The technology here offers a further range of options: Biodiesel technology http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel_supply.html#tech Best Keith > >----- Original Message ----- >From: Scott Lewis >To: 'William Clark' >Sent: Saturday, August 17, 2002 7:59 PM >Subject: RE: BIOX process > > >Dear Bill, > >We at BIOX are really not looking to build smaller plants at this >time. While our cost of production is approximately 1/3 of other >biodiesel process', in order to remain cost competative with petro >diesel, the low cost of feedstock is critical to profitability. We >at BIOX believe that everyone would choose green if the cost were >the same and, that said we are committed to larger situations which >allow for greater economies of scale. > >Also, we see the key market lying in blending biodiesel with petro >diesel at the commercial level. Gov't standards or mandates will >probably take care of all our supply for many years to come. See >the EPA standards set for sulfur reduction in on-road diesel by 2006 >(www.epa.com) and Senator Daschle's proposals for alternative fuel >blends to the year 2020 (www.biodiesel.org). These gov't mandates >alone will require over 16 billion gallons annually in the US by the >year 2020. > >I hope that this answers your questions. > >Yours truly, > >Scott Lewis > -----Original Message----- > From: William Clark [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: 16 August 2002 16:18 > To: Scott Lewis > Subject: Re: BIOX process > > > Scott, > > Thank you for your prompt reply. I think your smallest plant is a >bit larger than I need now. Would your process work in smaller >amounts? If so, would you be interested in ideas for serving smaller >markets? I feel that I can make a significant impact in smaller >markets; I am from one. I look forward to your reply. > > Gratefully, > > Bill Clark > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Scott Lewis > To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' > Cc: Kevin Norton > Sent: Friday, August 16, 2002 1:24 PM > Subject: FW: BIOX process > > > Dear Mr. Clark, > > Thank you for your interest in BIOX. For general information >about BIOX, please look at our website www.bioxcorp.com. > > In response to your email below, there are some qualifications >required regarding the feedstock but basically we can process any >mixture of vegetable oils, agricultual seed oils, animal waste >greases/oils, recycled cooking oils/greases up to about 30% free >fatty acids. > > Unfortunately, we won't discuss the cost of a plant prior to the >execution of our Non-Disclosure Agreement. However, I will explain >that we intend to lease the plants to the end user and charge a >royalty on all throughput. Ant potential partner will be expected >to give a covenant satisfactory to BIOX to guarantee the value of >the lease. Biox operates and maintains the plants through Siemens. >BIOX plants will be available in capacities ranging from 7.5, 10, >20, 30, 60 and 100 million litres /year (based on operation at 90% >capacity 7 days per week, 24 hours per day, 52 weeks per year). > > Please get back to me with any further questions by email or call me at > > Office 416 324 8610 ex 240 > > Yours truly, > > Scott Lewis > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: William Clark [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: August 16, 2002 10:32 AM > To: Kevin Norton > Subject: BIOX process > > > > Dear Sirs, > > My name is Bill Clark. I live in S.E. Alabama. I have recently been > examining the potential to produce biodiesel from waste veg. oil and > chicken fats. We have a large chicken processing plant near here. I > would be much interested in discussing the use of your process here. > Please inform me as to how we might discuss this possibility. > > Sincerely, > > Bill Clark ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~--> 4 DVDs Free +s&p Join Now http://us.click.yahoo.com/pt6YBB/NXiEAA/mG3HAA/FGYolB/TM ---------------------------------------------------------------------~-> Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuels list archives: http://archive.nnytech.net/ Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address. To unsubscribe, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
