Subject: RE: [Biofuel] Methanol update Peter: Hi Peggy, Thanks for your post. I am tip-toeing here a little because I would never say I know as much as you about the ethanol/methanol debate. When someone knows more than me, my tendency is usually to shut up and listen.
Peggy: I can send a copy of a report that may interest you in making your decision on ethanol production: Sweet Sorghum for a Piedmont Ethanol Industry by Glen C. Rains, John S. Cundiff, and Gregory E. Welbaum. If you would like more info, just e-mail me back. Peter: Because I fully and absolutely intend to build a still and distill ethanol, I have studied the ethanol conversion process. Peggy: We build small distilleries that are stand-alone setups designed to go into third world countries with no infrastructure. These are places where they still carry wood and haul water. The unreacted biomass (lignins) is burned to make steam, which powers a turbine to make the electricity for the plant (and a little excess) and the spent steam from the turbine heats the cooking stages and distills the ethanol. We use total biomass, not just the starch and soluble sugar fractions. Crops are good sources of biomass, but do not overlook the use of cellulosic waste that cities are currently putting in landfills. Nuisance vegetation is another good "free" source of ethanol. Peter: Ethanol from fruit or cane juices seems very attractive. In Cambodia, a liter of 75% ethanol sells for about $2. They use it to spike drinks. They distill it from fermented rice mash. I have personally seen the crude stills that they use. It is fantastic that they could make alcohol at all. Their production was maybe 50 liters per day. They used the cheapest fuel they could find for distillation : sawdust for $.01 per kg. <snip> As a fuel substitute, where the price needs to be more like $.50 per liter, not so easy to make money. But I intend to try. Peggy: We are working with the Rio Grande Valley Sugar Growers to assure that the farmers always get their best prices on sugar cane. That is what coalitions and cooperatives are all about. If the farmer can get the best price selling for sugar production, then that is what they do. However, there are times when the sugar market is soft and we can pay more for the full harvest (except for the root structure, corm, and a small portion of the stalk that goes back into the ground as a soil nutrient). The fuel ethanol production capacity for the whole plant (upper) is phenomenal! The stalk is not burned in the field as with sugar production and we anticipate a total processing cost of about $.30 a gallon. Peter: From my understanding, ethanol from biomass is a different story. The two most popular ways to hydrolize biomass are acid and enzymatic hydrolysis. Many enzymes are proprietary and most are not easy to make on site. Then you have the problem of converting pentose sugars. If you don't do it, yields are low. If you do it, you need exotic or genetically modified organisms. Peggy: Yes, it is a shame that the NREL and Canada are controlling the engineered organisms that can change our nation. At least they are finally releasing them to the large operations because the large operations are willing to pay the cost for an abundance of the product. They do not seem to be interested in small growers at this time and maybe that can change. But in evaluating who the corporate entities are that are buying in, it looks like it could be a squeeze play. And although I do not lean toward government interference, instead relying on individual's innate abilities to accomplish goals independently, this could be a place where government could step in and make allowances for the small producer to have access to equal opportunity based on production capacity--for the good of the world. Also, because a portion of the government (NREL) has actively participated in development of the process, they should be vested in the public interest. (Ha!) However, you cannot patent nature and nature holds many secrets that an experienced biochemist can take advantage of. Our associates are set up with microbiology labs and starter cultures straight from nature. It's a part of our package. Furthermore, we have many different foreign contacts that we will develop into associates pending their viability. Working with a person in a foreign country is tricky and does become a bit more expensive because we are requesting that one of their local attorneys solidify our patent agreement in that country (International patent rights)--and heaven's knows what that can involve. When a production facility is ready to upgrade, we buy back the smaller production unit unless it is used in tandem with the larger unit or re-located within the scope of our associate's production capabilities. Phillip: Then we have another economic problem. You are in business to make money (aren't we all?). A small operator like me could never produce enough to pay you anything worth while. So you will not want to divulge all your process details for very little money. This is understandable. I guess I would do the same thing if I were you. It's business. Again please understand that I am not saying there anything wrong with this, just that it stops me quite effectively. Your process sounds fantastic, but in the final analysis, if we can't produce ethanol, it is only a mirage. Peggy: Gosh Phillip, I thought I was making more sense than that during my email entries. The point is that each of the interested people from this forum should be able to do more than make personal ethanol. Our primary business, production contribution is in the final finishing or the step taken to remove the last 5% (or so) of water to produce 200 proof ethanol. In this we save the fuel ethanol producer a great deal of money! If you want to experiment with a backyard still, go to Robert Warren's site http://www.alcohol4fuel.com/id36.html and buy his still plans. Robert is one of our founders (currently not in the United States or participating in BEC and we look forward to his returning to California). But the point of my participation in this forum is to let people understand that they can do more for themselves and for their communities without a huge personal investment in money. However, it does take time which can be reimbursed many fold once the system is up and running. You do understand that producing ethanol for $.30 and selling it for a couple of dollars allows a large margin for distribution and taxation cost. Capital costs are not out of reach for the entrepreneur who is willing to do the leg work. Phillip: Therefore, I'm going to sidestep the whole "ethanol/methanol is better" debate and just say that ethanol from cellulosic biomass, while very interesting, is not possible right now for the majority of us in the list. Peggy: Ethanol is a safer and healthier choice for the person who operates the system. Phillip: For you it is possible because you know how to do it, but for the rest of us who don't, no. Sure, a batch or two in the garage, yes. A few links are out there doing a batch in a plastic garbage can, but the economics are not addressed, and no pentose sugar fermenting. Peggy: Our system digests both five and six carbon sugars. We call it the mechanical cow and named the small unit "The Ruminator" and the large unit "Big Beau". Capacity ranges are from 70,000 gallons annually to 12 million gallons annually. And it is not necessary to maximize production and still be profitable because the set-up costs are still have a profit range for batch processing--say twelve hours a day six days a week instead of the 24/7 that large processing plants require to be profitable. Phillip: An economically viable process for a few hundred liters per day including equipment design and enzyme manufacture, no way. It will be very possible when more process details become available in the public domain. For those of us who are not chemists, we must await. Peggy: No need to wait. Phillip: Lot's of information in the public domain about gasification of biomass. I'm thinking of building a biomass gasifer (specifically sawdust) and convert my pickup truck. That's step one in methanol synthesis. The low pressure methanol process from syngas patent that Walt posted is quite significant. Methanol will probably be the next motor fuel. I say this mostly due to methanol's ability to be easily manufactured from natural gas (also digester biogas), and later as a hydrogen carrier for fuel cells. IMHO. Peggy: There is a gasification process up and successfully running in New Mexico. They spent many million on the installation and their production cost per gallon is the same. We are setting people up for a few hundred thousand and the coalition members help in cost sharing. Farmers can be assured of a reliable market for their produce. Also, if your country RED (rural economic development) assists in grants or loans... then, there are other funding opportunities. This kind of funding is what takes so much time. But then, what do you have more of? Time or money? Peter: Please correct me if I am wrong about anything. I want to be. I would love to make ethanol from biomass. I just don't know how. Sorry for my long reply. I am trying to explain myself without offending anyone. Peggy: I hope that I addressed your concerns. I will be pleased to send you an email entitled "Frequently Asked Questions" and our "Inquiry Form" when you are ready to consider a new venture. Actually, I only recently became involved in fuel ethanol production which is why I joined several Internet forums. The distiller's forums are great for ways and means to produce beverage ethanol. Each production sequence has different preferred qualities. We don't make drinking alcohol. Previously I was only involved in one fuel ethanol crop: Cattails which can produce over a thousand gallons of ethanol per acre and be used to remediate wastewater (that's right human waste water) with excellent success. The only draw back is that during a flood, the usual 96% microbial reduction can spill too many microbes into the storm water. Actually, this problem and drinking water quality can be solved/ addressed with mycological filtering downstream. Two different mycologist that I work with have five log reduction of E. coli through their myco-mats. One uses a white fungal mat and the other uses shitake. Both are well-known in their fields and research by a small community of mycologist. But that's another story and if a person wants to set up a cattail farm, we should talk. Best wishes, Peggy Best Regards, Peter G. Thailand _______________________________________________ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
