Six Ways to Alleviate the Conflict Between Food and Fuel
As people debate the conflict between food and fuel, entrepreneurs and scientists are giving us something even more precious than resolution of that debate: options and alternatives. Here, Biofuels Digest takes a look at 6 technologies and strategies that address food vs fuel, and offer alternatives.
1. Feedstock diversification.
In biofuels, it is more talked about – the push beyond corn starch and cane sugars into corn stover, sugarcane bagasse, woods and forestry residues, animal wastes, algae, municipal solid waste, and energy grasses as well as new inedible oilseed crops such as jatropha, carinata and camelina.
But there are opportunities for food manufacturers as well.
Take for instance Solazyme Roquette Nutritional’s whole algalin flour. According to the makers, it provides “an outstanding solution for improving nutritional profiles in many applications, such as bakery, beverages and frozen desserts. Acting as a whole food ingredient, Whole Algalin Flour is very low in saturated fat, is trans-fat free, cholesterol free, and considerably reduces calories, as well as provides fiber and protein, while providing the same overall mouth feel and consistency as a full fat food.”
Much of the underlying problem of food vs fuel is that multiple sectors have fallen in love with the same feedstock – frankly, that’s Nestle’s problem, and the problem of many biofuels producers. If the US is addicted to oil, many producers are addicted to corn or cane, and both sides benefit from diversifying where possible.
2. Increasing yield per ton.
There are low-yield biofuels technologies – and high-yield, in terms of productivity per ton of biomass. At the high end, consider for example Coskata’s 105 gallons per ton, and Zea Chem’s 135 gallon per ton yields. Compared to a technology that yields, for example, 60 gallons per ton (and they are out there), that can reduce feedstock requirements by half.
But there is more than just picking the right technology. Great technologies are those that optimize their yields. For example, the US ethanol industry used to have yields in the 2.5-2.7 gallons per bushel range. Today, 2.9 gallons per bushel is state of the art at many facilities, and POET has found ways to increase that to 3.0 gallons in some cases.
Continuous improvement is what has analysts excited over KiOR, too – when first deployed at demonstration scale, the technology was yielding in the mid-60 gallons per ton, based on Southern Yellow Pine. But the company expects to reach 92 gallons per ton by mid-decade – nearly a 40 percent improvement.
3. Reducing water intensity.
When drought comes, water is more precious than ever. That’s why it was big news this week when Syngenta announced that it has signed trial agreements with Golden Grain Energy (GGE) of Iowa and Siouxland Ethanol of Nebraska to demonstrate the value of Enogen grain. Both ethanol plants will complete a three-month trial with the specialized corn grain bio-engineered to allow ethanol production to be more efficient, cost effective and better for the environment.
Golden Grain Energy and Siouxland Ethanol will begin their trials in the spring of 2013 with Enogen grain harvested from acres planted this past growing season. Following the trial, each plant will analyze data to discover the efficiencies created from Enogen trait technology. Pending trial results, each plant will then enter into negotiations with Syngenta to sign a commercial agreement.
As we wrote last year in profiling the technology:
“So, you get around a 10 percent lift in total capacity (from the speed-up), plus energy, water and carbon savings.
For example, in a 100-million gallon plant, efficiency improvements enabled by Enogen grain can save 450,000 gallons of water, 1.3 million KWh of electricity and 244 billion BTUs of natural gas, and carbon dioxide emissions by 106 million pounds.
That works out to around 8-10 cents per gallon in savings – that can be shared by the grower, the plant, or the customer.
4. Supertraits and super yields.
As we pointed out in 7 paths of the New Agriculture:
If new crops are unavailable, and residues exhausted, why not try to get more productivity out of the overall plant. In the old agriculture, there was double-cross hybridization to put more vigor into a plant, and there have been additional inputs such as added nitrogen, to assist with the growing cycle.
But in the new agriculture, there are traits that confer drought-tolerance, heat-tolerance, pest- or pesticide-tolerance.
Just last week, the U.S. Department of Agriculture deregulated MON 87460, Monsanto’s first-generation drought-tolerant trait for corn. Drought-tolerant corn is projected to be introduced as part of an overall system that would offer farmers improved genetics, agronomic practices and the drought trait. Monsanto plans to conduct on-farm trials in 2012 to give farmers experience with the product, while generating data to help inform the company’s commercial decisions.The drought-tolerant trait is part of Monsanto’s Yield and Stress collaboration in plant biotechnology with Germany-based BASF.
In specific bioenergy crops, companies such as Ceres (switchgrass, energy cane in the Blade energy crop family) and Mendel Biotechnologies (miscanthus) have been garnering the most attention as they bring new traits forward for the new integrated biorefineries utilizing energy crops.
5. Utilizing Waste Lands.
If all the above strategies are already used, or unavailable, why not bring lands into production that have previously be un-productive. This is closely related to the “super traits” pathway – in fact, many of the same companies, such as Ceres, are hard at work on traits such as salt-tolerance that will open up lands with previously unsuitable soils or water sources. But there are also companies such as SG Biofuels, working on developing non-food, extremophile crops like jatropha that can better handle poor soils and low rainfall, through its JMAX portfolio.
And, there’s microalgae from the likes of Sapphire Energy and solar fuels from the likes of Joule Unlimited. Yields in the 3,000 to 15,000 gallons per acre range – compared to around 400 this year for US corn ethanol yields (or closer to 500 in a normal rain season).
As we profiled in Natural Gas and electrofuels: one-stop shopping for energy independence:
Electrofuels use microoganisms — typically bacteria — to directly utilize energy from electricity and do not need solar energy to grow or produce biofuels. ARPA-E’s Electrofuels program is seeking to take advantage of those properties to create processes that are up to 10 times more energy efficient than current biofuel production methods. Back in 2010, they funded 13 projects that will attempt to bring a feasible technology forward to achieve those productivity levels.
The gallons per acre range – the numbers could be truly astronomical given that these can be produced them in three-dimensions to achieve efficiencies of acreage. Given that they utilize electricity rather than photosynthesis, production units can be stacked. The limiting factors are in the costs of engineering and constructing stacks, not in available light per acre.
6. Improving results from photosynthesis.
One of the more exciting entries in recent years is the recent class of technologies funded in the ARPA-E PETRO project.
PETRO aims to create plants that capture more energy from sunlight and convert that energy directly into fuels. ARPA-E seeks to fund technologies that optimize the biochemical processes of energy capture and conversion to develop robust, farm-ready crops that deliver more energy per acre with less processing prior to the pump. If successful, PETRO will create biofuels for half their current cost, finally making them cost-competitive with fuels from oil. Up to $30 million will be made available for this program area. More on the PETRO project here.
The bottom line
Food vs fuel, for most, comes and goes with price cycles. We see it as a transitory debate, usually focused on a handful of feedstocks that producers of food or fuel have become overly dependent on. We see it in oil, too.To us, diversity is the solution – and diversification the strategy, and scientists and entrepreneurs must ultimately solve the debate by ending the need for it.
CONNECT













11 comments on "Six Ways to Alleviate the Conflict Between Food and Fuel"
September 10, 2012 8:45am
Your article fails to mention a simple solution which eliminates most of the food/fuel conflict, namely: extracting the oil from oilseed crops, using it for cooking, and then processing the used oil into biodiesel. This can be done for most oilseed crops, and the press cake is almost always protein rich and available for human or animal consumption. Some oil, of course, is needed for human and animal consumption, but most is now obtained after extraction, as residual oil from press cake, or indirectly from consuming animals. All of these options would still be available. Sorry, this doesn't help ethanol, but bio ethanol is generally a losing proposition anyway.
September 09, 2012 11:23pm
The guest editorial in the Sept., 2012, issue of the Journal of Petroleum Technology, the official publication of the Society of Petroleum Engineers tells the story of the change from whale oil to petroleum and the asks if petroleum is about to be the victim of LENR (Low Energy Nuclear Reactions). LENR technology still is branded as junk science, but at least three companies (Leonardo Corp., Brillouin Energy, and Defkalion GT) are about to announce products with Leonardo Corp with its Ecat device saying they will market their product in October of this year. LENR devices are simple, cheap, clean, and cheap and clean to operate. The physics has been suspect since its discovery in 1989, but is evolving into acceptability. All I can say additionally is: "Wait and See.
September 10, 2012 6:40am
When companies say they are "about to release" a product, it's usually vaporware - in other words, they're doing marketing on something that isn't ready or working. It doesn't mean that it will ever work, only that they continue to find investors that are willing to take a chance on the technology.
September 09, 2012 10:47pm
I think you all missed the real point of the article, we have been diciking around with petroleum products for more than a hundred years and we have almost reached the technology level that cannot improve. Now we are starting into the brave new world of biofuels where new inventions, technologies, feedstock and uses happen on a daily basis. Up to now we were fat dumb and happy and considered biodiesel as cute and quaint, but is big business and it will come from sources you have never heard of yet. Then again, the gas engine's almost as good as it gets, diesel power is also on a daily improvement rampage with common rail getting 60MPG in a store boughten VW. My point, we can no longer afford to look at biofuels as counterculture, it is our only hope for the future.
September 09, 2012 9:48pm
Plant-based biofuels will never replace oil. If you go through the calculations of energy input versus energy output for the complete life cycle (starting with the energy input of the sun, then planting, harvesting, transportation, processing, and finally burning the ethanol for fuel in an inefficient combustion engine), you'll find that plants are about .01% efficient in converting the sun's energy to useful output. On the other hand, you can buy solar panels today that will convert solar power at 15-20% efficiency (or more). Even with some losses from battery storage, photovoltaic solar is still 50 or 100 times more efficient than biofuels.
On top of that, if you run the numbers, you'll find that you need to use every available acre in the US to grow enough plant material to replace the amount of oil that we use.
Stacking multiple crops in a smaller space won't work because the amount of sunlight is still relatively constant over that space. It defeats the purpose if you have to import power from some other location. You can get some boost by using leftover heat from nuclear power plants (especially with algae), but that requires a lot of water and a nuclear power plant, so it's a limited solution.
September 09, 2012 4:58pm
Promoting GE crops? This is nonsense. There are SO many problems with genetic engineering that I could go on all night. People, we need to stop expecting "new technology" to make it possible to continue to live like kings and queens. Yes, royalty. Let's bring ourselves down several pegs and make do with less. Technology may come up with some solutions but it's a myth that it can ever make up for the loss of our most favorite drug, OIL. Find your neighbors and start enjoying simpler pleasures like ... talking to each other? Making jam together? It's only been the last 200 years of human history that, accumulated, have had this devastating affect on our planetary home and on our societal cohesion. Let's reclaim some old values along with a little bit of new technology. Everyone will live better. Check out http://transitionus.org
September 09, 2012 1:28pm
HMMM ...and not a single word here about HEMP, which is an oily WEED which can grow in gravel (so no need for it to impinge on farmlands).
It's also been touted as yielding six TIMES as much energy as corn-based ethanol.
So, what about it, Jim Lane?!
;-)
September 09, 2012 12:02pm
This article is very interesting especially on high yield ethanol production.
However, propaganda of prohibition again keeps secret a plant that is drought resistant, will grow in any climate from arctic circle to antarctic circle, in soil that few crops could survive, produce more biomass per acre than the 6 closest competing crop combined, plus produce more terpines (natures cloud seeding chemical), plus remove more CO2 from the air sequestering more carbon in it's deep root system and release more oxygen, plus from the seed, extract 40% oil by weight for biodiesel with a residue protien powder that is the only botanical source of all essential amino acids and protiens human beings require. Have guessed what this amazing crop is? Here are a couple more clues. It was required by law for farmers to grow in American colonies and helped win WWII despite the fact it has been illegal to grow in the U.S. since 1936. And we import $400 million worth per year from Canada and other countries.
It is cannabis hemp.
If this scares you please look up. "Jackherer.com" for other 20,000+ uses of cannabis and "Granny Storm Crow'
s List " for an 800+ page bibliography of the medical benefits
September 09, 2012 9:53am
What a confusing article and from the Media souce that paints Monsanto as a satan. People are not getting enough calories with the right blend of fats, proteins and nurients due to breeding plants and animals to grow at 3 to 4 times their normal rates. Quicker to market, quicker to profit, all about the money. Yet this article touts foods lower in calories and lower in fat? And this is a good thing? No it is not. Much of the world is suffering from malnutrician as it is. We need to go back to crops with fat, protein, and calorie content of the 1800's not more franken-foods. There is a reason why large herbavoirs spend so much time eating.
Let's go plant crops on waste lands? Yeah, that's such a great idea. They are "waste" lands for a reason. Unless you are talking about subdivisions which were built on prime farmland. Let's tear down the cookie cutter houses and move them to the waste lands where nothing can grow and restore the farms to the good land.
I understand that Mr. Lane is from the fuels industry, but did anybody bother to read beyond the headline before posting it? The part of alternative means to produce ethanol were interesting and wish he would have focused on Six Ways to Improve Ethanol Production.
September 09, 2012 9:21am
There is one more tiny little idea: CONSUME LESS !
September 09, 2012 9:57am
Not in America, that is Blasphemy. Isn't it any wonder why you don't hear about Zero Energy homes and buildings like they have in Germany? Or why we still use gasoline rather than diesel which gets better mpg?
Spend your way to prosperity. Debt = riches and wealth.