In Illinois, the technology formerly belonging to
Coskata has re-merged as the newly-minted Synata Bio, which was
formed last year.
Synata filed a Red D form
with the Securities & Exchange Commission, detailing a $10 million
investment, which sources have identified as coming from True North
Venture Partners. Sure enough, True North partners Matthew
Ahearn and Steve Kloos are listed as directors of the firm, along
with long-time industry scientific guru Jay Kouba, last himself seen
running another natgas-oriented business, Trelys, which itself has
attracted investment from ARCH Venture Partners and FirstGreen
Partners. Kouba has also had roles with Amoco, BP, Metabolix, Virent,
Tetravitae, and Siluria. Kloos is currently serving as Synata’s
Coskata had been focused, via gas fermentation, on
converting natural gas to fuels. We suspect that, given low oil
prices, Synata Bio may steer that technology towards attractive
opportunities in chemicals. Possibly acetic acid, propanol or n-butanol.
The filing lists the company address as “4575
Weaver Parkway, Suite 100, Warrenville, Il, Illinois, 60555”, which
long-time observers will recognize as the former Coskata
headquarters. Sources have also told The Digest the as much as “half
of the old Coskata scientific staff” have been hired on by Synata
Bio to continue the company’s research. Sources also indicated that
Synata acquired the Coskata technology.
1, It is important to
realize that companies have commercialized
for capturing CO2 directly fromair (DAC):
(Climeworks AG, Switzerland; Carbon Engineering,
Canada; Skytree, Netherlands), 2, generating H2 electrochemicallyfrom H2O:
(Siemens AG, Germany; Hydrogenics, Canada; SunﬁreGmbH, Germany; Proton On Site, USA) 3, or even synthesis gas byfurther conversion of H2 with CO2, producing a mixture of H2and CO by co-electrolysis of H2O and CO2:
4, and producing hydrocarbon or oxygenated fuels fromCO2 and H2 or synthesis gas catalytically:
(INERATEC GmbH,Germany; Gensoric GmbH, Germany;
Velocys, USA; PrimusGreen Energy, USA; Carbon
Engineering, Canada; Hydrogenics,Canada; Carbon Recycling International, Iceland).
The world produces and consumes about 100 million barrels of oil per day - or
about 36,500 million (36.5 billion) barrels of oil per year. Since the standard 42
gallon barrel of oil weighs 275 pounds - or about 0.138 tons (275lbs per barrel
/ 2000lbs per ton = 0.138tons per barrel), this means the world is burning about
5 billion tons of oil per year (36.5 billion barrels * 0.138 tons/barrel).
The United States consumes about 20 million barrels of oil per day - or about
7.3 billion barrels of oil per year - or about 1 billion tons of oil per year.
So the report above has us covered.
(As always, the Devil is in the details.)
And the above is just from tree trimmings, etc. Also "Metropolitan Solid Waste
or MSW", better known as city garbage, city and septic tank sewage, feedlot
agricultural waste, "Black Liquor" boiler fuel from paper mills (they can use
the tiny nuclear reactors instead for heat and electricity). Since we're running
on nuclear heat, in case we have too much water in the plasma torch mix, drying
things out without too much cost or emissions should be feasible.
Rule of thumb: a million tonnes of LNG
produces about 4 terawatt hours in a modern electricity plant. A 1,000 MWe
nuclear plant produces ~8TWh/yr @ 91% CF. - Rod Adams.
fromBiomass Compositional Analysis for Conversion toRenewable Fuels and Chemicals
As the world continues to deplete its nonrenewable resources,
there has begun a shift
toward using renewable
materials for the production of fuels and chemicals. Terrestrialbiomass, as well as municipal solid wastes, provides
renewable feedstocks for fuel andchemical
production. However, one of the major challenges to using biomass as a feedstockfor fuel and chemical production is the great amount of
innate variability betweendifferent biomass types
and within individual biomass species. This inconsistency arisesfrom varied growth and harvesting conditions and presents
challenges for conversionprocesses, which frequently
require physically and chemically uniform materials. Thischapter will examine intrinsic biomass compositional
characteristics including cellulose,hemicellulose,
lignin, extractives/volatiles, and ash for a wide array of biomass types.
Additionally, extrinsic properties, such as
moisture content and particle grind size, willbe
examined for their effect on biomass conversion to fuels using four major
conversionprocesses: direct combustion, pyrolysis,
hydrothermal liquefaction, and fermentation.
A brief discussion on recent research for the production of
building block chemicals from biomass will also be
BIOMASS PYROLYSIS FOR CHEMICALS -- Paulus
Johannes de Wild
The problems that are associated with the use of fossil fuels
demand a transition to
renewable sources for energy
and materials. Biomass is a natural treasure for chemicalsthat up to now are
made from fossil resources. Unfortunately, the heterogeneity andcomplexity of biomass still preclude exploitation of its
full potential. New technologies foreconomical
valorisation of biomass are under development, but cannot yet compete withpetrochemical processes. However, rising prices of fossil
resources, inevitably will lead toreplacement of oil
refineries with biorefineries. A biorefinery uses various types of biomassfeedstocks that are processed via different technologies
into heat, power and variousproducts. The
biorefinery is self sustainable with respect to heat and power and puts noburden on the environment. Thermochemical processes such as
fast pyrolysis can play animportant role in
biorefineries. Within the scope of biomass pyrolysis as a renewable optionto produce chemicals this chapter presents a review of some
pyrolysis-based technologiesthat are potential
candidates and that form the starting point for the work that is describedin this thesis.
(Left) Carbon Dioxide produced per million British Thermal
Units (BTU) of heat.
(Right) Combustion Fuel Candidates
How to think about replacing the fossil fuels that have
served mankind so well for so long?
Job #1: Replace coal with nuclear. (The worst at 206
pounds of CO2 per million BTU.)
Job #2: Replace oil with renewable biosynthetic combustion fuels. (161 pounds
of CO2 per million BTU.)
Job #3: Replace natural gas with biosynthetic hydrogen heating gas. (117 pounds
of CO2 per million BTU.)
As you can see from above, wood (cellulose) is really loaded with carbon-neutral
carbon that can make a lot of biosynthetic liquid fuel per BTU. This is why your
author selected the electrically powered plasma gasification column instead of
the autothermal incinerating gasifiers. Captured CO2 in cellulose is too
damn valuable to burn.
Replacing coal with nuclear to make electricity
is the easy part.
Replacing oil and heating gas with CO2-neutral
biosynthetic fuels is the hard part. How much will we need to make?
We will need about 8,000 or so Renewable Biosynfuel
like the one this website is talking about to replace coal (with nuclear) and
oil (with Biofuels). This website's facility is limited by it's plasma torch
column to gasifying a maximum of 200 tons of renewable biomass per day. It has
to share it's 500 megaWatt(e) nuclear electricity generator with a
thermochemical hydrogen generator and whatever electrical and thermal energy the
catalytic biosynfuel refinery requires along with the electricity demand of the
park's nearby cities.
There is a diversity factor over the plant's 24 hour/7day
per week operating cycle that may make predictable peak energies available:
(Above) A ThorCon dual reactor installation is good for 250 +
250 megaWatts maximum. Not all that big when you consider the heat load
chemical water splitting and energy needed to control catalytic hydrocarbon molecule
joining. Fortunately, both hydrogen and oxygen can be stored for later use.
Looks like making Biofuels might be a night job for the
Renewable Biosynfuel Factory's Power Plant.
Greenway Technologies Inc. and
INFRA Technology LLC, through its wholly-owned subsidiary, Greenway
Innovative Energy (GIE), have
signed a non-exclusive Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) to jointly
design and deliver Gas-to-Liquids (GTL) plants combining their respective
proprietary technologies: INFRA’s xtl and GIE’s G-Reformer.
INFRA Technology group has developed and patented a proprietary
Gas-to-Liquids (GTL) technology (INFRA.xtl), based on the Fischer-Tropsch
synthesis process, for the production of light synthetic oil—which is close
to a product, characterized by Shultz-Flory alpha of 0.77—and clean liquid
synthetic transportation fuels from natural and associated gas, as well as
from biomass and other fossil fuels (XTL).
INFRA has commissioned its own production of the proprietary
Fischer-Tropsch catalysts. Production capacity is up to 30 tons per year.
GIE has developed and patented a transportable, scalable and economic
converter for synthesis gas generation needed to feed an F-T reactor called
In addition to these necessary components, building GTL plants requires
the leadership and financial discipline of an Engineering Procurement
Contractor (EPC) to deliver on-time and on-budget build programs. GIE has
been working with Audubon Engineering for several years and named the
company its EPC firm in 2018.
The agreement addresses the need to process various natural gas streams
into liquid fuels. There are worldwide initiatives underway to reduce the
amount of flared and vented gases which waste valuable natural resources and
contribute to CO2 emissions.
By combining the capabilities of both companies, the time to deploy
plants capable of processing flared or vented gas will be reduced. GTL
systems from the companies can also be used to process coal and biomass
assets providing the ability to convert these natural gas streams into
useable products including diesel, gasoline, and jet fuel. These fuels,
derived from natural gas, will be incrementally cleaner than similar
Currently, INFRA’s team is performing start-up operations on a 100 bpd
demonstration plant (M100) located in Wharton, Texas. The company’s plant
will convert natural gas to SynCrude, with components of diesel, gasoline,
and jet fuel. This demonstration plant has a modular design that will allow
integration of other components for testing, such as the G-Reformer
technology from GIE, and the catalysts that produce varying fractional
amounts of end-product for sale.
This plant also provides the scalable design baseline for larger plants
and serves as an economic model for the technology, process, and design
With respect to aromatics, there is no lower limit
for petroleum fuels, yet blends with synthetic fuels must have aromatic
concentrations between 8 and 25%, to ensure that seal swelling occurs. If the
lower limit of aromatics could be reduced and H/C ratio increased, lower
(non-volatile) particulate matter emissions (and smoke), and increased heat
release (per unit fuel volume) should result. In addition, increased thermal
stability of fuels will increase the ability to recover more energy in the fuel,
increase the cycle efficiency, as well as decrease operational maintenance
costs, all of which will enhance the large-scale introduction of new fuels and
increased cycle efficiency.
·Kalghatgi, G., Levinsky, H., & Colket, M. (2018) “Future
transportation fuels.” Progress in Energy and Combustion Science, 69,
This website is still a draft. The candidate document's footnote numbers go with a
private database. Copy the document's title and submit it to Google. The
document may still be posted on the Internet.
The low quantity of fossil fuel required to produce
renewable ethanol (and thus reduce fossil GHG emissions) is due largely to
three key factors.
First is the yield of renewable biomass per acre. Current corn-grain yields are
about 4.5 tons/acre. Starch is 66% by weight, yielding 3 tons to produce 416 gal
of ethanol, compared to an experimental yield of 10 dry tons of biomass/acre for switchgrass hybrids in research environments (10 dry tons at a future yield of
80 gal/ton = 800 gal ethanol). Use of corn grain, the remaining solids
(distillers’ dried grains), and stover could yield ethanol at roughly 700
gal/acre. Current yield for nonenergy-crop biomass resources is about 5 dry
tons/acre and roughly 65 gal/ton. The goal for energy crops is 10 tons/acre at
80 to 100 gal/ton during implementation.
Second, perennial biomass crops will take far less energy to plant and cultivate
and will require less nutrient, herbicide, and fertilizer.
Third, biomass contains lignin and other recalcitrant residues that can be
burned to produce heat or electricity consumed by the ethanol-production