What others view as number four in biofuels, we see as number 1. Why? We see potential in POET.
Posted by 2011wd in 2011 Power Report, 2012 BTL report, 2012 Energy Report, DSM, Poet/DSM on March 8, 2012
We see that potential because of the DSM effort. This is a classic example of a company with 1st generation design and build model, reaching out to a forward thinking broad based bio products group.
Very smart move on their part. Shame that had to go to Europe to find that kind of thinking. Why is that?
Far more progressive and far more open minded in Europe. MAJOR ASSET in Alternatives.
It will be the added cellulose phase that we see as the future. How this might assist old design and build models might be directly related to the sugar fermentation option, however that is not the forward path we would take.
Chemistry Paths that address the true demand.
Posted by 2011wd in 2012 BTL report, 2012 Energy Report, Bio Based Research Institute, Biorefinery, Green Chemistry, Waste To Energy on March 8, 2012
What we now have with companies in America is a rush to file rights on work that is of very little economic value, hoping it will assist in the funding process.
The logic being the rights will protect their short sighted business model efforts.
They are wrong. All it will really do, is have others run the other way. We on the other hand are about bringing the very best science minds together for the benefit of all. Come with your proof of concept, your science research, or your lic. if you wish. Here all will be respected.
One of the true green science Chemistry paths is here, and addressed the ligno pretreatment phase in a light that clearly understands that lignin is and always has been a bio based product worth producing. Funny how almost every part of the integrated path has treated some of the most valued bio based products as nothing more than waste to be burned. Once again. WRONG.
Where we have had our advantage from the start is with our green chemistry mentor. The greatest Chemist of his generation from our perspective will always be Andy Miga. He is gone now & He has been deeply missed. Without him we would have very little understanding of the merit of a truly integrated Bio-refinery. If you think you are up to Andy’s speed, we want to talk to you. It will help if you know you are the very best & are willing to back it up. You’ll have to understand value where other see waste to beat out Andy.
Don’t come to us with rights that prove you have some small % of success in a tube. If you want to talk Fractionation that is proven to be cost effective and economical, bring it, otherwise do not waste our time with rights that prove NOTHING other than to help raise money from companies willing to throw money at the problem.
The Bio Refinery Objectives. 2012
Posted by 2011wd in 2012 BTL report, 2012 Energy Report, Bio Based Research Institute, Bio-Composites, Bio-gas, BioBased, Biology, Biorefinery, Feedstock on March 7, 2012
2012
To Design and Build,
A new breakthrough, competitive, sustainable, safe and eco-efficient processing routes for the simultaneous manufacture of transportation fuels, (CH)power, food, feed, and added-value bio-based products (chemicals, materials). As first presented by IEA BioEnergy While this objective was spelled out in 2010, we have been working on this integration concept for over 20 years.
The idea it was possible to be sustainable and not be integrated with your design build was never something we believed in, nor did we ever see a crop based feedstock as any type of sustainable feedstock source. If you don’t have algae in the mix you will never get there. If your algae research is not advanced, you can simply start over. If your biology is any less than your chemistry work, your lost. If your starting now be ready to spend a lifetime learning from your mistakes.
Insightful proof our Bio Based BTL & GTL research institute is the future. What must be added is a training program for GTL operations and conversion. The CHP aspect is an important aspect to integration, we would only add more power will be needed on site from day 1.
If you don’t know the green legal teams and understand their many demands, you might want to join their non-profit .orgs and get up to speed.
We are not saying it is required to agree with everything any lawyer requires. We are simply saying you might consider sitting down and listening to the clean, green, viewpoints presented by very insightful people who care about a sustainable green future.
We don’t agree with the focus or direction taken by the green legal powers that be, however we respect many of their long term objectives. They do not understand the KEY PRIMARY aspect of BTL and GTL energy production, nor do that understand working wages and the demand for low cost fuel. That is their mistake. It is & always has been, PEOPLE, PLANET, PROFIT, not the other way around.
1Eco is, has, and always will be our green sustainable liquid fuels distribution brand across the downstream and midstream path. We understand every phase of the old energy business model and have always reported our view that this is required energy understanding. This does not mean we will not be selling gasoline and diesel on site. We will. What it means is we will have a solar powered fueling center, that offers bio based fueling products, hydrogen, & electric power hook up. It will not look like any fuel center in the market place today, however the cost demands per location for redesign are so extensive, we are exploring new locations. This doesn’t happen until our first Bio-Refinery is producing fuel. One of our primary production products will be our own Bio based GTL blended gas liquid. There will be no biorefinery in the world that will be more cost effective, directly related to our GTL research. If you have missed GTL then you have missed the the whole midstream and downstream value chain and we can’t help you. While we are offering to assist select companies with signed consulting agreements, most simply can’t see the forest for the trees. They are burning through money now and they will be burning through money until it is gone, then they will simply go get more, from investors willing to THROW MONEY AT THE BASIC BUSINESS MODEL. In that case, maybe they might want to limit the negative numbers per quarter until they get their research heading in the right direction. We are not cheap, however we are always fair & more than happy to assist those who begin to understand they need consulting assistance.
Gevo has been rated third in 2011.
Posted by 2011wd in 2012 BTL report, 2012 Energy Report, Biorefinery, BTL, CAD/BIM/GIS, Cellulosic Bio Refinery, Gevo on March 6, 2012
Gevo has the new fuel product regarded by many in the know, as higher alcohols attractive.
GEVO 7.17 0.50 6.52% 2.17 187.12M -40.08M 3.10 38.42% 5.60 -2.15 -0.54 26.10M -0.15 -18.22% -0.56
They also have a negative EBITDA of
-40.08M for 2011.
With a 26M float and the forward est. earnings projected to be -53 cents per share, it would seem the negative EBITDA will keep coming for a while.
No one has proven to us as yet, that the science for their favorite alternative fuel, has proven to be cost effective per gal. From what we know with regard to that complex higher alcohol objective the price has not come down by the gal. While we admire the higher alcohol objective, we find it hard to believe it can be produced cheaply as yet.
If we are wrong, we will eat crow, as this is just our two cents. Why not, PROVE IT. What you don’t hear with all of their science speak, is any words with regard to cost effective production costs. Not one word. Is it any wonder then the negative numbers keep coming.
The first question that should always be asked with every new alternative fuel blend & feedstock is this. What is your est. cost to produce per gal?
If they can’t tell you. Move on down the road.
The size of the plant is as important as the design and build.
Posted by 2011wd in 10K Dekatherms, 2012 BTL report, 2012 Energy Report, Bio-AutoGas, Bio-gas, Biorefinery, BTL, Butane, CAD/BIM/GIS, Cellulosic Bio Refinery, Ethane, GTL, Price on March 6, 2012
Anything over 30,000 gals a day is to much during the first phase.
It is possible to see large scale development projects ongoing in alternative fuels and nothing is more ill advised than spending to much money or building to a plant that is far to big. If there is not a blend of BTL and GTL Advanced research in the build, the cost is misguided at best. What comes of these large scale plants is poor utilization rates and that can be seen across the board. Add in transport costs and you have a recipe for operations & economic disaster.
Only when the mix is integrated and designed around modular model phase advancement will it be designed correctly. Anything else is simply a waste of money.
There are excellent people within the research and business development arms of the alternative energy business. Those people are of interest to us. As we review each company in the BTL & GTL reports we are only reporting on the numbers spent and the design and build as we see it.
This does not mean their research and business efforts don’t show promise or that they may not experience growth in the outlying years. Their research maybe wonderful and their business model may yet prove successful. We simply see everything from the investor side of the line.
Viewed as if, it were are own money, because it has been. Every step of the way.
Plants are reported with yearly production models. We find that most amusing. As if the plant will be operating all day,every day. What our lifetime in operations has taught us from the trouble shooter side of the line, is this. The key to success is learning operations and managing operations over time with a cost effective business model and trained staff. Past that you never know if your going to be producing the next day or not.
You sure as hell, don’t know your annual numbers, unless you have a working history of proven results, which is not the case with any integrated bio-refinery, anywhere in the world. Might look good to help raise money from investors, but otherwise, it’s bull corn.
What the markets do tell is this. If you can’t produce for $2 a gal, get out of the business.
The problems with crop based biofuels are many. None more so, than supply and demand.
Posted by 2011wd in 2012 BTL report, 2012 Energy Report, Biorefinery, BTL, Supply & Demand, Sustainable Food Production on March 5, 2012
There are those who think you can take an old ethanol plant and convert it to new advanced working methods, thus saving money. The more logical & cost effective path is that the buyers of these old plants, simply hope to produce more and better crop based ethanol with their processing know how.
What they may not factor in is the potential problems.
None more so, than supply and demand.
If you reduce gasoline use in the U.S. Domestic, you will also reduce the need for ethanol as a blending fuel. If you have a crop based ethanol plant & that crop is selling at a high price, now your FEEDSTOCK has priced your plant out of business, or at the very least SHUT IT DOWN.
This might give you time for your first old design idea and that was to retro fit the plant. Problem is the cost. Big mistake using a FOOD source for FUEL.
Until your FEEDSTOCK is Non Crop Based your plant is of little value as a blending fuel because your product is not in Demand. This while demand is dropping all the time U.S. Domestic as less FUEL is being used. The goal is to REDUCE DEMAND BY 33%. This allowing for the END of IMPORTS coming from the M.E.
It would seem most in alt. fuels, simply forget that conservation objective. BIG MISTAKE.
Seems #2 on the Biofuels Hot list has a large scale business plan & the -EBITDA that goes with it.
Posted by 2011wd in 2012 BTL report, 2012 Energy Report, Access To Capital, Biorefinery, BTL, Dollar, Feedstock, Fertigation on March 4, 2012
The problem with large business plans is they may cost more. The simple solution to the problem seems to be raise more money.
The poorest performer in the #1 Area we track, with regard to BTL.
AMRS 4.90 0.29 5.59% 1.47 223.75M -168.87M 1.61 1.24% 20.10 -3.99 -0.53 45.66M -0.13 -40.84% -8.76
The key number. -$168.87 Million Dollars.
Does this mean the company will never make a profit?
All it means is, that in 2011 they lost $168.87 Million Dollars
What we hate to see if private money coming in after the fact, via dilution.
$83M new money raised
They do have one person we really admire. She, no doubt, is being held back.
Solazyme, The Future of Oil. What about the now, of EBITDA?
Posted by 2011wd in 2012 BTL report, 2012 Energy Report, Biorefinery, BTL, Company by Company, Solazyme, Uncategorized on March 4, 2012
2012 BTL Energy Report will look back at 2011 and review all of the TOP 40 Firms securing money & how the money was spent.
Does EBIDA Matter when research is ongoing? How much burn rate is needed, required to produce a profit?
Should it matter? In our mind it does. This based on the fact we see things from an investor perspective.
Solazyme, rated number 1 by some who view biofuel. Current stock price…
SZYM 13.05 0.50 3.69% 3.36 779.11M -48.97M 20.76 69.92% 20.40 -1.35 -0.27 59.70M 0.00 9.57% 1.58
The 1st number we track, -48.97M
We look much deeper in our annual report.
Flickr Photos
More Photos
