Heard on the Floor at ABLC: 1357 attendees, registrants crowd the opening day, sideline chat of ABLC Digital

What the delegates were saying about CNG, fuel cells, and hydrogen, biogas as a platform, new markets, including EVs and succinic acid,  policy, methane, emissions, novel crops, and renewable diesel.

In Florida, ABLC Digital opened for 583 registered delegates — and 774 additional viewers taking in the four hours of ABLC content that was streamed on BioChannel.TV. More than 70 took part in zoom-based Digest Lounges in the after hours to meet and connect in an informal environment.

In all, 27 speakers took the stage for 7-1/2 hours of opening day presentations that focused on fuels, renewable chemicals, policy and sustainable agriculture. Simultaneous feeds in Asia and Europe kept the proceedings in business hours for bioeconomy leaders unable to travel owing to COVID-19 restrictions. 463 interactive comments were recorded in the Americas main stage online channel.

Let’s take a look at some of the best of the sideline commentary, on CNG, fuel cells, and hydrogen, biogas as a platform, new markets, including EVs and succinic acid,  policy, methane, emissions, using novel crop oils, novel renewable diesel technology

Biogas as a platform 

7/7/2020 12:34 Wolf Weiss: Leveraging existing infrastructure can be a huge plus when evaluating renewable options.

7/7/2020 12:35 Paul Bryan (Indep. Consultant): Biogas can also be a concentrated point source of CO2 for upgrading, if renewable H2 is available. That’s an alternative to injecting H2 into the digester; economics will determine which is the superior approach)

7/7/2020 12:37 Joel Stone: Big plus for AD is the use to convert animal waste versus letting the animal wastes releasing methane to the atmosphere. Capture the methane for RNG or power generation.

7/7/2020 12:37 John Shideler: Biogas is getting a big boost from the California Low Carbon Fuel Standard which values the CO2 emissions reductions from biogas utilization at $200/ton +.

7/7/2020 12:38 Paul Bryan (Indep. Consultant): John S. – Yes, CA should be a great proving ground. hopefully with more opportunities to follw.

7/7/2020 12:39 David Dodds: Good point by Michele about different feedstocks leading to different scales – I hadn’t thought about that in a salient point.

7/7/2020 12:39 Wolf Weiss: Suggestion for companies working on biogas/RNG/AD/etc: talk about your economics, not just products and environmental benefits.

7/7/2020 12:40 Paul Bryan (Indep. Consultant): David – Yes, pipeline injection economics will be more dependent on scale than local direct uses. Just to be clear, my statement was not against pipeline injection, just cautioning that costs have to looked at carefully in each case.

7/7/2020 12:40 David Dodds: Joel – how about the waste food input for AD? Lots of water, and the nutrient value is high – and (unfortunately) there is a lot of it her in the US and developed countries generally.

7/7/2020 12:42 Joel Stone: Food waste is perfect David. Even FOG can be fed to present day AD units.

7/7/2020 12:43 Chris Roland Holst: Funny alway’s Germany is referenced and never Denmark where the followed a different more scalable way of AD and hence more professional run systems. Contact me if you like to learn more. https://www.linkedin.com/in/christiaan-m-p-roland-holst-3017651/

7/7/2020 12:45 Jim Lane: Chris, what’s different about Denmark’s approach compared to Germany, if there’s a brief way to put it.

7/7/2020 12:47 David Dodds: Chirs – yes (Jim beat me to the question)

7/7/2020 12:48 Chris Roland Holst: Germany small farm based AD’s and Denmark is larger more industrial size plants handeling the manure from multiple sites often piped in .

7/7/2020 12:48 Paul Bryan (Indep. Consultant): Lots of approaches can work, but some require a great deal of tracking and paperwork. Taxing fossil carbon at the point of production or import should be simpler.

7/7/2020 12:49 Chris Roland Holst: 20-25.000 tons compared to 300-500.000 tons installations

7/7/2020 12:49 Paul Bryan (Indep. Consultant): And for people who wants CREDITS for capture and sequestration, the onus is on THEM to do the accounting and reporting, not some government agency to go chasing after them.

7/7/2020 12:50 David Dodds: ….or printing them…..

7/7/2020 12:50 Paul Bryan (Indep. Consultant): Indeed. I’ve worked with a very interesting company called Anaergia that has multiple technologies to improve methane recovery and value of fertilizer from AD.

7/7/2020 12:51 Joel Stone: Additional benefit of AD is making use of the digestate as valuable fertilizer.

Methane and emissions

7/7/2020 12:55 Jim Lane: About taxing methane emissions. Wolf Steve Weiss once noted: “My personal opinion? Yes, absolutely. Making that happen will require coordinated action in US, EU, China, etc – and some way to ensure consistent policy and administration of it for decades. Interesting question is how to be ready with “the details” of how to count what would be taxed. E.g.: does someone estimate methane leaks from pipelines and at oilfields? Measure them? What happens if I can come in with some tech that grabs some of those emissions and turns them into a genuine carbon long-term product sink (a durable material/product)? If capturing emissions and putting them to use is exempt from a tax, then that can be an incentive for various technologies to get deployed – whether bubble-like structures, per below, or other mechanisms. You could also imagine varying incentives based on how efficiently some system recycles/reuses carbon, and for how long.” Thoughts?

7/7/2020 12:57 Joel Stone: If we undergo a tax program on fossil fuels then NG would be taxed and RNG would not be taxed and let the free markets go to work.

7/7/2020 12:57 Chris Roland Holst: Michele, if you talk foodwaste it does not only come from MSW. What about the processing industry. Their streams are much bigger and homogeneous

7/7/2020 12:58 Joel Stone: Chris, Food wastes from all sources would be valuable for conversion in AD.

7/7/2020 12:58 Adam Whalley: One thought is to let laissez faire capitalism rule. More leaks = less product = less profit

7/7/2020 12:59 Paul Bryan (Indep. Consultant): Leaks below the economic threshhold ares still bad for the atmosphere, so there needs to be an additional penalty.

7/7/2020 12:59 Chris Roland Holst: Hi Joel, I understand that is why I mentioned the non MSW stream!!

7/7/2020 13:00 David Dodds: Adam – that would work if the accounting were complete. Right now, the cost of letting (fossil) methane leak into the atmosphere is not a cost, only a diminishment of product/profit. But that leaked methane has a libabilty (it is a GHG), and that cost is not being accounted. That is true across all fossil carbon.

7/7/2020 13:01 Joel Stone: For those intersted in the method of Carbon Tax included in the Energy Innovation and Carbon Dividend act please check out the Digest from yesterday or listen into Digest Connect

7/7/2020 13:01 Adam Whalley: All true. But practically, how to measure the leaks, and do it fairly across the board?

7/7/2020 13:03 David Dodds: Actually – don’t bother. Tax it when it comes out of the ground – now ALL the costs is accounted – them let people plug their own leaks, and take other actions to increase their profits.

7/7/2020 13:03 Paul Bryan (Indep. Consultant): Adam – There are ground and air (UAV) based sniffing technologies, and combined with our ever-improving ability to measure winds and atmospheric mixing, tracking CH4 emissions is increasingly practical and affordable

7/7/2020 13:04 Joel Stone: Carbon Tax: https://www.biofuelsdigest.com/bdigest/2020/07/05/biofuel-elements-of-bipartisan-eicda-the-digests-2020-multi-slide-guide-to-energy-innovation-carbon-dividend-act/

7/7/2020 13:05 Paul Bryan (Indep. Consultant): My old friends at Chevron have been tracking CO2 conc. over millions of sq. miles in NW Australia to establish baseline to verify that their major CO2 injection project on Barrow Island is truly being contained and not leaking out to the surface.

Using novel crop oils

7/7/2020 13:27 Paul Bryan (Indep. Consultant): Crop oils like those from CoverCress can be part of the “New Crude” picture. Methanol could be a big part, but also these oils, pyrolysis oils, ethanol, bio-gas, and H2

7/7/2020 13:29 james iademarco: Thanks Jim for the morning kickoff and digital program. Listening to my former colleague and friend Jerry Steiner right now. We go back to the mid-80’s working for Mother M. Covercress is an interesting story and is getting traction.

7/7/2020 13:29 Chris Roland Holst: Jerry, What does an additional crop do with the soil health which generally spoken is all ready in very poor state?

7/7/2020 13:31 Paul Bryan (Indep. Consultant): Chris – Jerry will have the details, but often winter cover crops IMPROVE soil nitrogen because the are nitrogen fixers. They will tend to consume more water than a fallow field, I think.

7/7/2020 13:33 Chris Roland Holst: Thank you Paul but isn’t that only a very small part of soil health?

7/7/2020 13:34 Paul Bryan (Indep. Consultant): True, but these are surface planted, so no plowing, and they grow a strong root system, so subsurface carbon. Again, Jerry will have details, but cover crops are generally considered beneficial to soil health, not harmful

7/7/2020 13:35 John Shideler: Is the oil from crosscress food grade?

7/7/2020 13:35 Chris Roland Holst: Thank you Paul, we need to be very carefully with our soil which we have exploited to long! Do you use solvents in extracting the oil or just pressing?

7/7/2020 13:37 Paul Bryan (Indep. Consultant): Jared Diamond’s book “Collapse” has an interesting chapter about ag in Australia titled: “Mining Australia.” Not a positive review, unfortunately. But some say we are mining Iowa, too.

7/7/2020 13:39 John Shideler: How does Covercress compare to brassica carinata?

NextChem using corn oils from ethanol plants to make renewable diesel at small scale

7/7/2020 14:41 Chris Roland Holst: What are your waste streams?

7/7/2020 14:42 Will Thurmond – Emerging Markets: Question for Nextchem and Saolo – how much corn oil do you need at a “bolt on” facility to break even on your CAPEX investment – and over how many years to reach ROI? Using a renewable diesel bolt-on technology at an ethanol plant using Distillers Corn OIl to make fuel via hydrodeoxygenaziation and isomerization – what type of CAPEX is necessary to make this renewable diesel a feasible project?

7/7/2020 14:46 Paul Bryan (Indep. Consultant): There are also corn hybrids (like Cargill/Monsanto “Mavera” that are especially high in protein and oil. These could produce a higher-protein DDG as well as more oil per acre; maybe better for an Ethanol / HRD plant? But also maybe a route to FAEE Biodiesel?

7/7/2020 14:47 Jim Lane: Minimum scale is a good question for this technology, Adam Belyamani is in the house, I’ll ping him.

7/7/2020 14:52 Michele Rubino: Minimum scale for RD is 10 MMGPY = 30 ktpy. Scaled to co-located, captive and low Carbon Intensity feedstock supply Payback for “scaled to feedstock” Renewable Diesel in the range of 3-4 years. Will depend on market assumptions. Compared to larger unit: disadvantage = diseconomies of scale. a

7/7/2020 14:56 Adam Belyamani: Thank you Michele for answering the question

7/7/2020 14:56 Michele Rubino: ADVANTAGE = feedstock costs. Aggregating a lot of bio-based, low carbon intensity feedstock is expensive.

7/7/2020 14:57 Paul Bryan (Indep. Consultant): What are the trade-offs between exciting new renewable based polymers and the complexity of recycling when new plastics enter the post-consumer stream?

7/7/2020 14:59 Will Thurmond – Emerging Markets: Thanks Michele – at $6-7 a gallon for Renewable Diesel in California, including LCFS at $210/ton and BTC $1 – a 10 million gallon/yr bolt on plant could generate a $200-$300 million before EBIDTA in a few years. Is this enough to cover the costs of hydrogen generation and isomerization equipment costs, or are leasing options at play as well?

7/7/2020 15:01 Daniel Dunleavy: for Saola, what is capex for a bolt on 10mm/gpy project.

7/7/2020 15:02 Will Thurmond – Emerging Markets: ps Michele I like the small scale integrated bolt on approach – not all big OG refiners should dominate this market. Cheaper hydrogen costs and co-location costs and lower feedstock costs, along with LCFS at $200+ and BTC looks like a good model.

7/7/2020 15:07 Paul Bryan (Indep. Consultant): Will – H2 sourcing will be key. If not renewable, there will be a substantial CO2 release from SMR. With HRD in small, local applications, I wonder about steam reforming of the PROPANE byproduct. By my math, that could supply a significant amount of the total H2 required, and of course it is renewable. Also can be useful as a heating/cooking fuel, though, so economics may depend on carbon pricing.

7/7/2020 15:11 Michele Rubino: @Will. With your assumptions we anticipate 3 year payback. Less with BTC. So yes covers costs. Options for leasing SMR for H2 production is possible. @Paul, even with H2 from Nat gas, the CI of renewable diesel made from distillers corn oil, tallow or yellow grease is in the 30s. Sry. @Paul. So very compelling. Very good offerings of small scale SMRs. But sure, renewable H2 is great. Knocks off additional 10 points. Certainly H2 from the propane by-product is an option. Requires a bit more capital to separate propane from fuel gas stream. Capex vs. cI tradeoff

7/7/2020 15:18 Paul Bryan (Indep. Consultant): Michele – Might be that a purpose-built steam-propane-reformer could accept an impure feed stream. And of course you need to separate the propane anyway if you intend to sell it as such. Michele – No question about CI, there are a lot more renewable carbons in the FA “tails” than in the glycerol “backbone,” but every little bit helps!

7/7/2020 15:22 Michele Rubino: Paul, good point. We are trying to use off the shelf modular equipment. Current design does. It separate propane. Leaves it i. The fuel gas. CAPEX vs CI trade-off. Plenty of opportunities as the drive to decarbonize gets into high gear Paul – I agree. Every little bit helps. As you point out the CI of RD is driven mainly by the carbon intensity of the FOG (fats oil and grease) feedstock Paul – RE: process energy needs, process is exothermic. Fuel gas is provided back to the co-locates ethanol Paul (cont’d – sorry I am on my cell phone). Excess energy provided back to co-locates ethanol

7/7/2020 15:31 Will Thurmond – Emerging Markets: Paul, Michele and Pat Gruber are telling me the same things – an MIT-style Systems Integration model to develop efficiencies helps to improve CI numbers and payoffs in Cali utilizing next gen Argonne-type LCFS models

7/7/2020 15:31 Michele Rubino: CO-located ethanol plant or other industrial facility. Good integration opportunity. Fuel gas stream also will have H2. So plenty of opportunities to recycle. Gas fractionation and treatment is not cheap. Our focus at small scale is simple and modular. So we leave something on the table. CAPEX vs CI trade-off

7/7/2020 15:33 Will Thurmond – Emerging Markets: i.e. recirculating carbon outputs between integrated systems, re-use of carbon and energy variables in the system – and recalculation in the CFS model (from integrated systems) to qualify for lower CI scores. TY Michele and Paul – Its good to see smaller & mid size players get in the game and give some of the bigger O&G cos some real competitive challenges and reasons to innovate

7/7/2020 15:44 Paul Bryan (Indep. Consultant): Will – For me, it comes down intuitively to resource vs. end-user logistics. If the two are close together, you get transportation savings vs. hauling from some distant, large-scale plant to end users, and that can offset some diseconomy of scale penalties. I have long promoted biodiesel based on locally-grown oilseed crops for developing countries / remote areas with poor roads where imported diesel is very expensive Does a cover crop like Carinata consume some fraction of the water available over the course of the year? In irrigated areas, does it increase irrigation needs?

Policy, Tax and Big Oil

7/7/2020 17:29 Joanne Ivancic: Mike, do you think the regional/states environmental groups will work for or against renewable fuels?  I’ve been attending the Transportation & Climate meetings in the midAtlantic and Northeast and I’m often the only one or one of very few that are not convinced that electrify everything isn’t the nearterm solution; not even mid term solution.

7/7/2020 17:31 Daniel Dunleavy: does the work to get biointermediates equal treatment under the RFS advance regardless of November outcome?

7/7/2020 17:33 Joanne Ivancic: And what about co-processing renewable feedstock (bio-oil, etc) at oil refineries?  I know that there are tracking issues, but could there be other incentives?

7/7/2020 17:35 Matt Snyder: @Joanne – ‘Electrify everything’ is a technological feint due to technology being decades from a 100% electric airliner, cargo ship or train. The world the public sees and understands generally doesn’t include heavy transport of goods or people.

7/7/2020 17:35 Joanne Ivancic: And note that BP and Shell are connected to governments, so they have to respond to environmentally friendly policies more than independents like Exxon

7/7/2020 17:36 Matt Snyder: Coercion to greenwash is the price BigOil pays to play.

7/7/2020 17:36 Jeff Passmore: Re Mike’s comments, if I am not mistaken Shell and BP have also both downgraded their reserves and subsequently their values.

7/7/2020 17:39 Joanne Ivancic: @Matt. Yes, aviation and shipping might get passes, but they really don’t understand that even if we are at 100% EV SALES in 2050, there will be plenty of vehicles that need liquid fuel. And they don’t think of many of the expenses and environmental impact of producing and moving that much electricity, and don’t think of the non fair-trade aspects of batteries. Just knee-jerk against liquid fuels.

7/7/2020 17:40 Matt Snyder: @Joanne – Amen, and I agree. — This is our time to shine!

7/7/2020 17:40 Jeff Passmore: Shell is the largest blender of ethanol globally – 9.5+ billion litres/year

7/7/2020 17:41 Gillian Harrison: Important to remember that @jeffpassmore

7/7/2020 17:42 Joanne Ivancic: I did hear a presentation with a fellow from NYSERDA gave a pretty good brief explanation of what it would take in infrastructure and need for nuclear power to get from here to an EV world.

7/7/2020 17:43 Matt Snyder: It’s too bad there is not feasible way for separate companies to coordinate their economic activity.

7/7/2020 17:45 Martin Brandt: Speaking from someone who has worked for two oil companies and deals with oil refining clients every day, you can’t group all oil companies in the same boat. They all have different cultures. Some are investing to improve their image but it’s mostly about image and they don’t do much when the rubber hits the road. Some genuinely want to help the climate change agenda. Some want to jump on board and make money in these emerging markets. Some like to litigate and use opportunities such as small refinery exemptions.. Bottom line is the oil and gas industry has a lot of money that can and currently is being used toward developing these technologies. To the extent you can look at them as possible partners, it is probably to the betterment of the development of the renewables industry.

7/7/2020 17:49 Joanne Ivancic: @Paul So we need the carbon tax that they are talking about now. How timely

7/7/2020 17:50 Paul Bryan (Indep. Consultant): Yup. I think that’s the only way to do it, combined with credits for VERIFIABLE net capture and sequestration.

7/7/2020 17:51 Matt Snyder: @Paul – I see your point and agree. Is there another inter-company dynamic that has potential for success, without the risk of repeating ugly business history?

7/7/2020 17:51 Joanne Ivancic: Jim: I think LCFS is more accepted because it was sold originally as a way to achieve and support EVs. Now, we can see how that performance-based system is working to promote more sustainable, lower CI liquid and gas fuels, too–but the old image still persists with many.

7/7/2020 17:53 Matt Snyder: Competition is great. But sometimes cooperation is the key to getting everyone to Point B. How can companies optimize competition and cooperation to benefit all the most?

7/7/2020 17:53 Paul Bryan (Indep. Consultant): Upstream Oil & Gas does tons of collaborative projects on multi-billion-dollar investments. Gorgon in NW Oz was over $50 million, divided 50% CVX, 25% RDS, and 25%XOM, with a couple of the Japanese end-users joining in later. It’s collusion to avoid competition where we get into trouble. Existing giants in oil, ag (Cargill, ADM, etc.), auto, etc. are plenty big to get it done, and they have plenty of technical competence, they only need for the drivers to make a sustainable future more profitable than business as usual

7/7/2020 17:56 John Oyen: those collaborative projects have one with the Operating Interest and the others buy in with a working interest. The Operator gets to make most of the decisions. the working interest is on the hook for their share of the project. It is how they hedge their assets.

7/7/2020 17:56 Paul Bryan (Indep. Consultant): Chevron, to take one example, typically plows ~20 billion per year into reinvestment, mostly to find and produce more oil & gas. The IOC majors together typically spend more than $100 billion per year. Make renewables the only profitable future for them, and they have plenty of money to invest.

7/7/2020 17:57 John Oyen: but it all takes time, planning and some clear stable economy

7/7/2020 17:57 JIM DOOLEY: When we have to count on partisan policies that underpin societal goals like sustainability, renewable fuels, etc. The investment risk horizon is reduced to election cycles and not capital investment and depreciation.

7/7/2020 17:58 Paul Bryan (Indep. Consultant): Jim – Right you are! It also takes stable POLICY, and in today’s partisan climate, that will only happen if it is BIPARTISAN, and Heaven only knows how that might happen.

7/7/2020 17:58 John Oyen: Or you need to prove the 3 P’s of sustainable projects. No Pollution, No harm to People and Profitability

7/7/2020 17:59 Paul Bryan (Indep. Consultant): IMHO, profitability is not possible at scale without significant carbon penalty.

7/7/2020 18:00 Jeff Passmore: The industrial bioeconoy suffers from a near complete communications failure. In a Sept 2019 Time special issue on Climate, there was not one mention of the bioeconomy in 112 pages of editorial. There is a lot of education of the media to be done.

7/7/2020 18:02 Paul Bryan (Indep. Consultant): Jeff – I agree. Solar and wind get a lot more press. They deserve plenty of it, but they are not solving heavy transport, and they are not solving light-duty transportation soon enough.

7/7/2020 18:03 Matt Snyder: It seems to me that a single success in biofuels big enough to indicate permanence would go a long way to changing minds.

7/7/2020 18:04 Paul Bryan (Indep. Consultant): Matt – I think that single successes are possible today, but the ones I can imagine are scale-limited. We need a success that can be scaled up to millions of BOE per day.

7/7/2020 18:04 John Oyen: there in lies the rub. Biofuels have limited geography for feedstock and thus are limited in capacity for scale

7/7/2020 18:04 Matt Snyder: Not with our technology. Production efficiency drops as distance from the Equator increases which requires less efficiency but enable production year round nearly anywhere.

7/7/2020 18:06 John Oyen: algae is different than woody biomass, msw or others

7/7/2020 18:07 Paul Bryan (Indep. Consultant): U.S. can probably displace 1/3 of all liquid fuels sustainably with biofuels, maybe a bit more. But to hit that level, we’re around $80 per ton on the biomass suppl;y curve. That is about $2/gallon equivalent for what is really a lousy feedstock for making liquid fuels. By contrast, more than half of the crude oil in the world is produced at a COST of less than $1/gallon, and it is far easier to make into liquid fuels. As long as the fossil guys get to use our atmosphere as their free sewer, biofuels cannot win at scale

7/7/2020 18:16 Jeff Passmore: I wonder how many journalists realize just how much renewable fuels are actually now blended – billions of gallons. One company alone – Shell – blends 2.5 billion US gallons annually. Small compared to global consumption, but directionally things are clear to Shell – they need to reduce their carbon footprint and are diversifying in that direction. See Shell’s New Energy Business.

7/7/2020 18:17 John Oyen: Others are following, Repsolm Total, ENI, and others. XOM just doesn’t promote what they are doing in this arena

7/7/2020 18:18 Paul Bryan (Indep. Consultant): The Euro-based majors — Shell, BP & Total — are much more aligned with a sustainable future because Europe is much more so than the U.S., although there are political forces at work in Europe pushing back on that. And much of Shell’s blending, if I am not mistaken, is through their Brazilian JV, and in Brazil the drivers for ethanol are not really environmental ones.

7/7/2020 18:19 Joanne Ivancic: @Jeff Yes. People in the US are surprise to hear that they are using about 10% renewables already in their gasoline.

7/7/2020 18:20 Chris Roland Holst: Jeff, Shell still does not share their strategy on how thye will turn their business. You can praise them for investing 10% in renewables but still 90% gois to fossil. Joanne , what is 10% Ethanol in your gasoline?

7/7/2020 18:27 Joanne Ivancic: @Chris Almost all regular gasoline in the US is E10; some E15, some E85. That doesn’t include the up to 5% biodiesel in diesel that is not even noted on pumps. If you are in US, look at your regular gasoline pump. There will be a label that indicates it includes up to 10% ethanol. More details are available from US DOE Energy Information Admin.

7/7/2020 18:29 Paul Bryan (Indep. Consultant): Matt – That would help. The traded commodity needs to be standard, though, like Y#2 corn, or discounted based on clear, agreed factors, like gravity and % sulfur for crude. Bioproducts will continue to increase their niche, and many will be profitable. But until we address fuels and commodity chemicals, we will not move the needle on GHG emissions.

7/7/2020 18:31 Jeff Passmore: Paul – mostly Brazil and N. America. Keep in mind that Shell is a public company with a fiduciary responsibility to shareholders. Those same shareholders need to demand low carbon diversification. Until then, Shell is hedging. But let’s not kid ourselves – it is us, as consumers, that create the demand for fuels. We create the externalities.

7/7/2020 18:32 Matt Snyder: In wide deployment, our tech could be the model for a consistent production standard. All things n time.

7/7/2020 18:33 Paul Bryan (Indep. Consultant): Jeff – Agreed. Like all of us, CEO’s respond to motivating factors, and for them those factors are bonuses and job security. Profits directly determine the former and lead indirectly to happy shareholders, which provides the latter.

7/7/2020 18:33 Matt Snyder: @Paul – Agree 100% on moving the GHG needle.

7/7/2020 18:34 Paul Bryan (Indep. Consultant): Matt – That’s why my enthusiasm about high-value products is limited. It’s too late in my life to worry about getting rich, so all that’s left is saving the world.

7/7/2020 18:37 Matt Snyder: Saving the world is exactly the same as herding cats, but different.

7/7/2020 18:40 Paul Bryan (Indep. Consultant): Reminds me of a great Steven Chu quote. He was discussing a redirection of research efforts with National Lab Leaders, and one of them said that it was like trying to herd cats. Chu thought for a moment, then said something along the lines of: “Well, I can’t herd cats, but I can move their food dish.” <long, awkward silence . . .>

7/7/2020 18:43 John Oyen: just like sales, incentive programs drive behaviors

7/7/2020 18:49 Will Thurmond – Emerging Markets: Paul – Sec Chu moved a $500 million food dish at UCal Berkeley that British Petroleum invested in. Chu helped herd $500 million in cool cash from BP cats into JBEI and other bio-based enterprises interconnected with national labs. To pursue next-generation “cellulosic” fuels, and some algae, based on applying high-speed Silicon Valley Biotech culture to loe speed Petroleum culture. It also landed him a job at DOE as Sec of Energy not long thereafter. My memories from 11ish years ago

New markets: Including EVs and succinic acid

7/7/2020 19:28 Doris De Guzman: @Wolf Both. One Chinese bio-SA producer is doing very well vs petro-SA. Have to check trade volumes.

7/7/2020 19:29 Paul Bryan (Indep. Consultant): Most PHEVs have a small battery, not a small engine. There are a few exceptions, but a short electric range is the norm. Doris. Not surprised, I think that bio is the superior path to SA for a couple of reasons, both related to oxygen content.

7/7/2020 19:33 Andy Shafer: Pavel makes a great point here – selecting the right segment makes a tremendous difference in penetration and traction!

7/7/2020 19:34 Wolf Weiss: I’d still be surprised re the economics for bio-SA. Anyone remember BioAmber? I still remember a presentation where they said they were ‘getting close’ to covering the cash costs of production(!) – long after starting up their plant. I still shudder about public shareholders paying to continue development of a process that seems like it was not ready for prime time.

7/7/2020 19:35 Joanne Ivancic: But can’t we expect electricity prices to go up somewhat related to need for extensive additional infrastructure? And what about environmental issues to building that new infrastructure and NIMBY related to big transmission lines. So, will market raise price of electricity if demand grows beyond ways to produce and transmit it?

7/7/2020 19:36 Wolf Weiss: It’s also an example of having an idea that sounds good (“hey, this is a ‘platform’ chemical!”) – but for which there wasn’t a big market, in and of itself. That means some combo of market/application development (= takes years, ask McKinsey); or converting to something else (adds capex and opex – plus you’ll have yield losses). Sorry to distract from Pavel’s EV discussion!

7/7/2020 19:37 Paul Bryan (Indep. Consultant): I was involved in some analysis for BioAmber, and of course I can’t talk about that, and I also saw some of the other secret scrolls when I was with the DOE. My impression was that the market expansion they were predicting (hoping for) did not happen, and the entrenched suppliers would not yield their share of the existing market. It’s the nearly always fatal combination of technical risk with market risk. I love the idea of EVs, but my concern is that unless their demand grows SLOWER than the greening of the grid, all they do is keep coal plants in business for longer.

7/7/2020 19:39 Martin Brandt: This is a really great presentation.

7/7/2020 19:39 Doris De Guzman: @Wolf @Paul PBS demand is taking off in Asia but you are right that 30 ktpa is too big when high volume demand is not yet there (BioAmber is hoping for a succinic acid-based BDO)

7/7/2020 19:39 Paul Bryan (Indep. Consultant): (their demand for electric power, I mean) Doris – Are they competitive with the Genomatica BDO route?

7/7/2020 19:40 Doris De Guzman: @Paul As far as I know, no.

7/7/2020 19:40 Gustavo Henriquez: Great presentation

7/7/2020 19:40 Wolf Weiss: curious to understand the inter-relationship of consumer interest in EVs with their readiness/interest to add solar panels to their roof. If I’m on the margin re getting my roof, does the idea that I can use it to recharge my car make me press go? Or, maybe once I have a roof I’m more likely to get the EV?

7/7/2020 19:40 Matt Snyder: Fantastic presentation!

7/7/2020 19:41 Paul Bryan (Indep. Consultant): Doris – Thanks! One NICE thing about SA is that all that oxygen makes for a great yield on a weight basis. Give up two oxygens, and you make significantly fewer pounds of BDO vs. SA.

7/7/2020 19:44 james iademarco: The existing SA market was very fragmented and never really targeted by bio-based SA producers. The emerging markets remained too price sensitive. At Reverdia, we did not feel that one could compete in BDO or deicers. We did feel that if PBS polymer would take off that this was one of the best homes for biobased SA….but clearly it has taken many years to develop as I left DSM 7 years ago, and at that time DSM was partnered with Roquette. While there are limits to the properties of PBS, it could provide sufficient demand for Bio-SA. However, I agree, most NA and EU investors likely will not revisit.

7/7/2020 19:41 Wolf Weiss: bio-SA competitiveness with Genomatica’s GENO BDO process? I highly, highly, highly doubt it – especialy with how geno has advanced things.

7/7/2020 19:46 Paul Bryan (Indep. Consultant): James – Nice summary! Getting a toe-hold with new polymers is a VERY steep hill to climb. High-volume polymer is very highly optimized and fastidious about the polymer employed.

7/7/2020 19:48 Wolf Weiss: @Joanne, good question. Multiple companies working on alternative chemistries that use more common materials, like zinc. Some of these also present fewer challenges at end of life, re disposal, recycling, etc. But: those are taking a while for ‘big-market’ applications, like EVs, versus more specialized use cases.

7/7/2020 19:48 Paul Bryan (Indep. Consultant): Jeff – Agreed. The people making THE SAME molecules from renewable resources are better off than those making new ones, but there still needs to be room in the market, and several start-ups I know have crashed upon those rocks even though their technology was sound and at least reasonably close to inttal cost estimates

CNG, fuel cells, and hydrogen

Joanne Ivancic: Jim: my dream panel, maybe on a future DigestConnect, to answer my question about replacing fossil hydrogen with renewable in transportation fuel production that requires additional hydrogen. There would be people that can answer the question of how much fossil hydrogen is needed per gallon of fuel (RD or jet); how much would/could that change the carbon intensity score; what are the other considerations (water consumption, comparison with other uses for hydrogen on an environmental and economic basis, etc.). I think its a conversation that needs to get started as people talk more about hydrogen, but we know things about hydrogen in silos and we should start sharing that information and thoughts.

7/7/2020 19:43 Ronald Cascone: How about CNG w/SOFCs electric hybrids?

7/7/2020 19:43 Paul Bryan (Indep. Consultant): Ron – Don’t SOFCs run very hot? Is start-up time and energy loss on cycling and issue? Just asking. What about CNG gas turbines driving a generator with all-electric drive train + battery capacity

7/7/2020 19:45 Ronald Cascone: There is no excuse for H2 fuel cell buses or trucks. The wolves agree that H2 is a non-starter

7/7/2020 19:45 Paul Bryan (Indep. Consultant): Ron – That’s a big 10-4

7/7/2020 19:45 Joanne Ivancic: Any chance that batteries will ever have to meet the same kind of sustainability certification (including working conditions for rare earth metal mining, environmental issues, etc.) that renewable liquid/gas fuels need to show? What would it take to make that happen? Any sustainabilty certification folks on this?

7/7/2020 19:46 Joseph Calhoun: The number two alternative fuel vehicle in the world is Propane. With Bio Propane … the net carbon intensity is zero or negative. Why aren’t we talking about now fuels instead of expensive infrastructure alternatives that will make US dependent on other countries. Why not Propane?

7/7/2020 19:46 Jeff Passmore: Paul – re market risk – technology companies need REAL offtake agreements – take or pay. Not “conditional” ones.

7/7/2020 19:46 Matt Snyder: H2 as a fuel is suboptimal.

7/7/2020 19:48 Ronald Cascone: EVs good; Fuel cells good, hybrids good; RNG good; methanol good: “hydrogen economy” bad

7/7/2020 19:49 Paul Bryan (Indep. Consultant): Joanne – As Steve said, LOTS of work going on, but also LOTS of very smart people have been trying for a LONG time, and lead-acid and Li-ion still rule the roost

7/7/2020 19:50 Wolf Weiss: Re market risk: prediction: major brands will increasingly step up and ‘provide strong input’ to their supply chains to go more sustainable. That will put additional pressure on the ones that may sign those committed offtake agreements. Watch this space over the next few years.

7/7/2020 19:50 Paul Bryan (Indep. Consultant): Battery R&D was one of the spots where Steve Chu placed a big food dish for the “cats.”

7/7/2020 19:50 Joanne Ivancic: So, why isn’t anyone demanding that EVs and their power value chain prove that they meet the same kind of sustainability criteria that renewable fuels have to meet?Maybe that would help this other battery development?

7/7/2020 19:51 Wolf Weiss: @Joanne: short answer (a gut feel / guess): because for many consumers, buying an EV in the first place already ‘checks the box’ re ‘I’m doing something sustainable!’ End of story, no need to peel the onion further.

7/7/2020 19:52 Doris De Guzman: @Ron, and yet I’m seeing billions of euros planned for green hydrogen investments. Just look at Germany’s recently approved National H2 Strategy.

7/7/2020 19:52 Paul Bryan (Indep. Consultant): Joanne – One variable that I know makes it tough is battery life, which tales years to determine accurately and is subject to constantly improved new generations of batteries. Amortize the batteries over a long enough life AND assume renewable electricity, and the EVs look pretty good.

7/7/2020 19:52 Joanne Ivancic: And “we”, the renewable fuels community, isn’t making an issue of it, isn’t raising their consciousnesses about it.

7/7/2020 19:52 Paul Bryan (Indep. Consultant): Joanne – EVs aren’t perfect, but I am concerned about the “circular firing squad” that exists in renewables, We all get so desperate to get our piece of the pie that we become the best advocates AGAINST every other renewable approach.

7/7/2020 19:54 Wolf Weiss: @Paul – yes.

7/7/2020 19:55 Paul Bryan (Indep. Consultant): I try to limit my sniping to H2 vehicles and DAC. For everything else, I try to at least balance criticism with acknowledgement of the pluses.

7/7/2020 19:57 Joanne Ivancic: I’d love for EVs to be as sustainable, affordable and available; fueled renewably with electricity made close to place of use. When I hike on the Appalachian Trail, there’s a powerline going across the path about every 3 miles in the Virginia/Maryland/Pennsylvania segments. And our community had people who never got involved in politics fanatically active against powerlines that were proposed to go across Maryland a few years ago. Just trying to say we need to consider all these things so that we can really decrease our pollution and carbon footprints as soon as possible.

7/7/2020 19:59 james iademarco: You know I can not recall any recent commercials on EV . I am sure I have missed them as I do not watch much TV, but curious if these companies are advertising to consumers, or are they afraid they may only have limited production capability that Tesla experienced early on. Just curious. Also, in US I thought EV were much less than 2.5% and I guess 2.5% was a global number, so when you take out China, this drops. Very nice talk by Raymond James