For much of the past decade, the biofuels industry in the US grew exponentially. During this period, the US became the world's leading producer of transportation fuel made from recently harvested plant material, producing about 44% of the world's biofuels supply in 2013. Brazil was a distant second at 24% of the global total.
The US government has encouraged the use of biofuels since the Energy Tax Act of 1978, which was an exemption for ethanol from the federal excise tax on gasoline. Some sort of tax exemption for ethanol remained in place at varying levels until the end of 2011. This exemption helped slowly grow US ethanol production, which reached 1.6 billion gallons by 2000 and 3.9 billion gallons by 2005.
But the turning point for the US biofuels industry came when Congress mandated ethanol usage in the Energy Policy Act of 2005. The act created the Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS), which required increasing volumes of biofuel to be blended into the nation's fuel supply.
Congress accelerated the adoption schedule with the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007. The result was explosive industry growth, particularly in the US corn ethanol industry, from 2005 until 2011. In 2011 some of the tax credits were allowed to expire, but the mandates under the RFS remain in place and will keep ethanol blending above 12 billion gallons per year for the foreseeable future.
But corn ethanol has long been viewed as an interim and partial solution as the world awaits the commercial development of advanced second-generation biofuels. Unlike corn ethanol and biodiesel, which are made from food crops, advanced biofuels can be made from non-food biomass such as wood chips, farm and forestry residues, or from th! e biomass fraction of municipal solid waste.
The US government has helped set high expectations for these advanced biofuels. The RFS stipulates that advanced biofuels must make up 22 billion gallons of the 36 billion gallons of biofuel required to be blended annually by 2022. That's a lot considering there was no commercial advanced biofuel industry in place when the law was passed (which remains true for the most part to this day.)
There are a number of options for converting biomass into advanced biofuel. An early contender was cellulosic ethanol. One of the major fractions of plant material is cellulose, which is comprised of long chains of sugars. In 1819, Henri Braconnot, a French chemist, first discovered how to break cellulose chains into individual sugars by treating biomass with sulfuric acid. These sugars could then be fermented to ethanol in similar fashion to corn or sugarcane today.
This technique was used by the Germans to first commercialize cellulosic ethanol from wood in 1898. First commercialization in the US took place in 1910 when the Standard Alcohol Company built a cellulosic ethanol plant in Georgetown, South Carolina to process waste wood from a lumber mill. Standard Alcohol later built a second plant in Fullerton, Louisiana. Each plant produced 5,000 to 7,000 gallons of ethanol per day from wood waste, and both were in production for several years before poor economics forced the plants to close.
Fast forward 100 years and a number of companies were once again vying to be the "first" to produce commercial cellulosic ethanol in the US to meet the Renewable Fuel Standard mandate. Despite mandates in 2010 and 2011 requiring the blending of 100 million and then 250 million gallons of cellulosic ethanol into the fuel supply, no qualifying cellulosic ethanol was produced in either year. Those unmet mandates were based on promises from would-be cellulosic ethanol producers who never delivered.
In 2012, the first qualifying batch (i.e., the first batc! h qualifi! ed by the Environmental Protection Agency to receive cellulosic biofuel tax credits) of cellulosic ethanol was produced when Blue Sugars Corporation (previously KL Energy) produced some 20,000 gallons of cellulosic biofuel in April 2012. Following this, no further cellulosic ethanol was produced in 2012, and Blue Sugars declared bankruptcy a year later.
A number of companies are currently building demonstration or small-scale commercial cellulosic ethanol facilities. These companies include DuPont (NYSE: DD), Abengoa (NASDAQ: ABGB), and privately-owned POET. These projects have faced delays and cost overruns, and could have a tough time in a market that presently has idle capacity for the production of lower-cost corn ethanol.
However, there are other advanced biofuels options that result in gasoline and diesel as the final products. The market for these so-called drop-in fuels is presently much larger than the market for ethanol, and the current fuel infrastructure is more compatible with these fuels.
One of these routes is called fast pyrolysis, the scientific study of which dates back at least 50 years. Fast pyrolysis occurs when biomass is heated rapidly to about 500° C. At this temperature, the components of the biomass break down in seconds into a pyrolysis oil (often called bio-oil) and char (which resembles charcoal).
The pyrolysis oil that is produced in this process resembles crude oil, but is initially as distinct from hydrocarbons as is grape juice from Chianti. Petroleum, or crude oil, was formed from the remains of ancient microscopic animal and plant life that accumulated on sea floors. Over time, sediments piled up over these remains, and the pressure of the sediments and the heat inside the earth gradually converted them into a complex mixture of chemicals that we know today as petroleum. If petroleum is exposed to high enough temperatures, it can be cracked to natural gas.
Notably, crude oil is made up of a great variety of hydrocarbons. Most of the comp! onents of! crude oil are composed of hydrogen and carbon only, and many of these are present in very long chains. The simplest component of crude oil is methane, the simplest hydrocarbon molecule with 4 hydrogen atoms attached to a central carbon atom. As the carbon chains get longer, you find molecules that are primarily found in gasoline (mostly hydrocarbons with 5 to 9 carbon atoms), kerosene (mostly hydrocarbons with 10 to 16 carbon atoms), diesel (mostly hydrocarbons with 12 to 20 carbon atoms), and fuel oil (mostly hydrocarbons with 20 to 30 carbon atoms). Some of the heaviest hydrocarbons found in crude oil can be found in the material sold as asphalt and roofing tar.
These chain lengths are important, and the fact that oxygen is generally not present in these chains is important. Like crude oil, pyrolysis oil is a complex mixture, but whereas crude oil is composed primarily of hydrogen and carbon, the compounds of pyrolysis oil contain a lot of oxygen. These compounds include aldehydes, carboxylic acids (like acetic acid), ketones, alcohols, sugars, and pyrolytic lignin, and their volumetric energy content is far lower than that of petroleum.
Despite a lower energy density — a gallon of pyrolysis oil may contain only around half the energy of a gallon of oil — pyrolysis oil can be converted to gasoline and diesel. Like the study of pyrolysis oil itself, the scientific study of pyrolysis oil upgrading can be traced back decades. Converting pyrolysis oil to diesel and gasoline requires further chemical processing, which adds cost, but also tends to fracture the components of pyrolysis oil (many of which are already short-chains) into even shorter hydrocarbon chains that are too short to be blended into gasoline. The result is that the ultimate yields of gasoline and diesel from biomass are quite low.
In a presentation several years ago, Iowa State Professor Robert C. Brown (with whom I regularly correspond) showed that it takes about 140 pounds of biomass (like wood chips) to! produce ! about 100 pounds of pyrolysis oil, which has a water content of about 20%. This pyrolysis oil then requires 4-5 pounds of hydrogen (almost exclusively produced from natural gas) to produce 30 pounds of gasoline and 8 pounds of diesel. More than 50% of the starting mass is converted to water and carbon dioxide, while another 15% is converted to light gases like methane.
Thus, while the technology has been known for decades and is viewed as promising, there are some substantial hurdles in place that have kept fast pyrolysis from economically competing with crude oil. A 2012 study by the Department of Energy (DOE) estimated the cost of producing gasoline and diesel from pyrolysis oil at that time in a commercial plant (at a scale that still doesn't exist) of $4.55/gallon. But the DOE projected that over time, the buildout of a number of commercial plants could drive the cost of production down to $2.32 by 2017 as the technology is further refined. The largest cost reductions were assumed to be in the upgrading step.
A number of companies have produced pyrolysis oil for years. Canadian firm Ensyn has been producing pyrolysis oil commercially for 25 years. UOP — a subsidiary of Honeywell (NYSE: HON) and a major supplier of upgrading technology and equipment for oil refiners — has developed technology for upgrading pyrolysis oil into hydrocarbon fuels. In 2008 UOP formed a partnership with Ensyn called Envergent Technologies to commercialize the biomass to pyrolysis oil to drop-in fuels pathway.
Commercialization all the way to gasoline and diesel remains elusive however. One company that has attempted to commercialize a variant of the fast pyrolysis/upgrading pathway is KiOR (Nasdaq: KIOR), a biofuel company that famed venture capitalist Vinod Khosla took public in 2011.
Despite the th! eoretical! promise of the pathway, and despite counting Bill Gates among its investors, KiOR has struggled and is on the cusp of bankruptcy. The share price has fallen more than 99% since its IPO. In next week's follow-up article, I will take a deeper dive into what happened with KiOR, and discuss the lessons for investors from KiOR's experience.
Conclusions
Despite optimistic federal mandates that required the addition of advanced biofuels to the fuel supply, commercialization has been slow to develop. Ethanol produced from cellulose was initially envisioned as a likely candidate for making a major contribution to the mandates, but project delays, overruns, and bankruptcy in the case of the first company to produce a qualifying batch of cellulosic ethanol have all tempered the initial enthusiasm. A different pathway called fast pyrolysis that results in drop-in fuels as the final product after upgrading has emerged as a contender, but this pathway has also struggled to gain a foothold.
In next week's Energy Letter, I will review the journey of one company attempting to make advanced drop-in fuels, and answer the question of whether this seemingly promising sector of the energy business has any attractive prospects for investors.
(Follow Robert Rapier on Twitter, LinkedIn, or Facebook.)
Related BZSUM Markets Up As Russia Seeks To End Military Activity Near Ukraine Markets Rise; Zynga Lowers 2014 Forecast 
Subscribe via Email 
Subscribe RSS Comments Please leave your comment: 
MORE GURUFOCUS LINKS 
194.4 (1y: -1%) $(function(){var seriesOptions=[],yAxisOptions=[],name='IBM',display='';Highcharts.setOptions({global:{useUTC:true}});var d=new Date();$current_day=d.getDay();if($current_day==5
Getty Images You may be determined to get out of credit card debt, but how do you actually do it? If you're like most people, cutting out that cup of joe you grab at your local coffee shop in the morning isn't going to cut it. You're going to have to use a combination of several strategies to help you reach your goal. Motivation doesn't seem to be the issue. According to a recent Credit.com survey, Americans and Credit Card Debt, 72 percent of people with credit card debt say it is "extremely important" or "somewhat important" to have a plan to pay off their credit card debt in 2014. And in fact, 85 percent of those surveyed who say they have credit card debt also report they have been successful paying down this kind of debt in the past. What techniques have people used to pay down debt in the past? We asked survey respondents to select all the strategies they employed to help pay down their balances and here's what they told us they did: Took in a roommate -- 3 percent Cut back on buying coffee from a cafe -- 13 percent Got a second job -- 14 percent Consolidated credit card debt -- 20 percent Cut regular expenses (cable, phone, insurance) -- 31 percent Stopped eating out as much -- 37 percent The No. 1 strategy listed by most respondents who said they paid down credit card debt in the past? "Started budgeting" was chosen by 60 percent of respondents. As dreaded as the task of creating a budget may be, consumers seem to be aware that if they want to pay off debt, they had better start paying attention to where their money is going. There can be a big payoff to creating a budget: Just tracking spending has been shown to have positive benefits, extending even beyond the money saved. Some research suggests that people who write down everything they spend may see improvement in other areas of their lives, such as eating less junk food and becoming more productive. Unfortunately, though, most consumers don't budget. Only 32 percent of households prepare a detailed household budget, according to a Gallup poll conducted in April 2013. Consolidation, Counseling and Bankruptcy As for other solutions those in debt are considering, the survey also asked respondents which of the following they have seriously considered, and received the following responses (from those with credit card debt): Credit card debt consolidation (15 percent) Credit counseling (8 percent) Bankruptcy (8 percent) While debt consolidation was the most popular option, getting a consolidation loan can be tricky, especially for those whose credit scores have been hurt by the debt they carry. In those cases, credit counseling may be a more realistic option. It usually has the effect of a consolidation loan -- lower interest rates and a lower monthly payment -- but it doesn't require good credit to qualify. Whatever method consumers use to get out of debt, it's going to take some willpower, creativity and hard work. And time. While 41 percent of those surveyed said it was extremely likely they would pay off all their credit card debt in 2014, it often takes people much longer than that, especially if their balances are large. But other consumers have succeeded in paying off massive amounts of debt, demonstrating that with the right strategies and in the right situation, anything is possible. As you pay down your debt, it's a good idea to track your progress on how it's affecting your credit. For one, it can be encouraging to see the positive effect that paying down your debts can have on your credit scores; but it's also good to just ensure that your payments are being reported accurately.
Getty Images Few people enjoy hiring lawyers. That's just a fact. If it takes a serious automobile accident, a divorce, or a death in the family to get you into a lawyer's office, then pretty much by definition, you're visiting under duress. But when trouble strikes and you actually need a lawyer, how do you pick one? According to Lawyers.com, the cost of legal services varies widely, from as little as $50 an hour to as much as $1,000 "or more." With such a wide range of prices to choose from, you'd think that the first factor people would look for in a lawyer is price -- specifically, a low price. Something closer to that $50 mark than to the $1,000, and as far away as possible from that ominous "or more." That turns out to not be the case. Earlier this month, online "legal Q&A forum, directory and marketplace" Avvo.com asked its users what they look for in a lawyer. While cost certainly was a factor (65 percent of respondents called it "very important"), it wasn't as important as "respect in the legal community," which 67 percent of those surveyed think is more important, or "track record" (80 percent). So it would appear that hiring a lawyer is actually a bit like buying a car. Price plays a role, of course, but more important is buying the right product, and getting good value for your money. Further bolstering the point, it appears that people who have more experience with lawyers are even more inclined to choose perceived quality over price. As Avvo's results reveal, the people most likely (72 percent) to pick a cheap lawyer over a good lawyer are those who've never used a lawyer before. Let's Get Personal All other things being equal, though, what specific qualities should you look for when choosing between two lawyers charging equivalent prices for their services? According to consumers polled by Avvo, the top three personal qualities that most customers look for when choosing a lawyer are confidence, realism, and aggressiveness. These beat out qualities such as friendliness, ability to reassure a client, or compassion. As Avvo explains, the feedback it got from its respondents is that when seeking a lawyer, they're looking for someone who's "a realistic go-getter" rather than "a hand-holder." 
And again, this makes sense. After all, the law is a complex thing. Most of us would much rather leave it alone, and not have to deal with it if at all possible -- which is one reason we avoid lawyers in the first place. It makes sense then that if you do run into some bad luck and find yourself with a legal dilemma that absolutely, positively, must be dealt with by a lawyer, you'd prefer to hand it over lock, stock, and barrel to a confident, realistic, and aggressive professional and let them deal with it. And really, for $1,000 an hour "or more," that's the least they could do.