Coal/biomass: The winning path for scale, cost, emissions in aviation fuels?
In Pennsylvania earlier this month, as the industry was breaking for the Independence Day holiday, the state of Pennsylvania announced a $175,000 grant to Accelergy toward a feasibility study to determine the location for a a Coal-Biomass-to-Liquids pilot production facility.
With the grant in hand, the Carbon Cycle Technology Alliance (a collaboration between Accelergy, defense industry powerhouse Raytheon and others) will also be evaluating the viability of CBTL technology and exploring potential partnerships with major Pennsylvania universities.
In Accelergy’s case, the CBTL process uses coal and biomass to produce alternative fuels that are twice as more efficient as existing coal-to-liquids technologies and reduce carbon emissions by 20 percent. The fuels are currently undergoing testing by the U.S. Air Force.
Ok, that’s interesting. 20 percent emission reductions compared to fossil fuels – that’s material. A combination of biomass and coal to do so – that sounds strong on feedstock availability, if the emissions work out as projected, and costs are in line.
So let’s check out Accelergy and its technology, as a means to replace to the 60 billion gallons of fossil aviation fuels. The Digest spoke Friday with Accelergy CEO Tim Vail.
The Coal/Biomass approach
“CBTL can negate the challenges associated with biomass only or coal only,” said Vail. “Also, so many in the space are chasing attributes of the fuel equation, while we are aiming at a broader approach.”
“There are four attributes we look at in developing a fuel where the target is petroleum. Fuel can be cleaner, less costly, more available in sufficient quantity, or be a higher performing fuel. Some are focusing on the “cleaner” attribute, while sacrificing cost and availability, like some of the ethanol developers or other biofuels. We will not be the cheapest not the cleanest, but our target is to beat petroleum in all four.”
Vail is projecting, thereby, a higher-performing, more available, lower cost and lower emission fuel than current petroleum options. That’s, as they say, a tall order. Let’s put some metrics on that.
“Our target is the section 526 regulations, which require 80 percent of the emissions, that is 20 percent below petroleum. Our initial work is with the Air Force. We are one of only a few that can produce 100 percent synthetic fuels that can reach that 80 percent threshold– and have a 30 percent better energy density than petroleum derived fuels.
Let’s also put some of the metrics on coat-to-liquids alone into the mix, to compare the relative potential benefit of the CBTL approach. In the Digest recently, we reported that in “a recent MIT-Rand report on the Near-Term Feasibility of Alternative Jet Fuels, life-cycle GHG emissions for jet fuels from coal to liquid (CTL) pathways without carbon sequestration are estimated at 2 to 2.4 times greater than conventional petroleum.”
Where is Accelergy is its technical development? “We already there at pilot scale,” Vail informs.
How does coal/biomass gasification work?
How does it work? Like biomass and coal co-firing for power, the introduction of biomass is the leverage used to ratchet down the emissions associated with coal-based fuels. In Accelergy’s world, the biomass of choice is camellia, and the company announced development back in March of a partnership to develop camelina resources. The more camelina in the mix, the lower the emissions. Pure camellia, there would be concerns on cost and availability in the near-term. But, aiming squarely at the 20 percent target, the company believes it can beat petroleum-based aviation fuels on cost. Interesting model, for sure.
CBTL technology is complex but understood. After all, coal to liquid fuels, for aviation, have been made for years by Sasol in South Africa, going back to the days when jet fuel was hard to obtain in South Africa because of boycotts associated with the apartheid era. In CBTL, there is a biomass portion, but otherwise there is a gasification phase of the operation, and then a catalytic reforming of a syngas into target molecules. The trick is to have a catalyst with the right selectivity – that is, efficiently grabs molecules for the preferred chemical reactions – and also it is helpful to have the most cost-efficient gasifier possible.
Accelergy has been working for some time up in North Dakota, at the Energy & Environmental Research Center in Forks associated with the University of North Dakota. That’s a small pilot facility. Among the investors to date have been Goldman, Nth, Sequioa and Lux Capital.
Algae as co-located consumer of CO2, source for biomass
What’s the project in Pennsylvania? Well, that’s interesting. There’s an algae component, to test the technology using algal fuels, and using the co-located algal production facility to take up CO2.
Why is that important? As is prevalent in the industry today, long-term plans for Accelergy are based in co-location with existing petroleum refineries, or other industrial sites that have excess oxygen or hydrogen. Hence the availability of CO2 and the imperative to use or sequester it. Hence algae.
The company is reportedly in negotiations with a US petroleum refiner at the moment, but is focused on the US and China.
“In the US, we definitely will pursue a licensee licensor relationship, comments Vail, “because of the intricacies of the US market, we want to go with a partner who knows how to permit and build. In China we will entertain – not a project developer role but may take an equity role.
Other markets?
“We have to be extremely cautious – focus is the name of the game,” says Vail. “The energy business is such a huge opportunity – you can burn up all your resources chasing opportunities.”
Expected plant size is impressive. It’s commercially viable at north of 4000 barrels per day, around 60 Mgy, according to Vail. The company’s fuels are expected to be certified by 2011 – that’s work taking place at the Wright Patterson AFB in Ohio at the moment. One thing the Air Force is looking for is higher fuel densities that are highly beneficial for supersonic jets.
18 month targets for the company’s development?
“Produce sufficient quantities of fuels to complete testing, then in fact complete testing, and announce commercial scale facility either US or China.”
With a 2-3 year build-out (the former a likely timeline for China, the latter more feasible for the US), we can look for the potential of a first commercial-scale facility by 2014, if all goes well in testing and financing. But its an interesting option indeed. Coal reserves are massive. Beating petroleum on emissions by 20 percent, with a lower cost and a higher fuel density useful for advanced aircraft.
Fascinating development we will be keeping a close eye on. Might be one of the best pieces of news in biomass/coal in quite a while, and surely better than simply combusting biomass and coal to make electrons.
More about Accelergy and CBTL
Accelergy’s camelina project with Great Plains.
More Coverage on this Topic
Category: News Analysis, Top Stories
FREE Subscription
If you enjoyed this article, subscribe to receive the Biofuels Digest email newsletter - the world's most widely read biofuels daily.
Comments (0)
Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed
There are no comments yet. Why not be the first to speak your mind.