Clenergen has announced a partnership with a division of home heating company Honeywell that is aimed at producing low-cost heating oil from high-yield biomass like the fast-growing plants Beema Bamboo and Marjestica, shown here. (image: ecoseed.org)

The latest exciting announcement in the production of heating oil from biomass came from New York-based Clenergen on Thursday. The company sent out a press release announcing a partnership with Honeywell’s Envergent Technologies to produce pyrolysis oil from fast-growing plants Marjestica, Beema Bamboo, and Vaneshree; pyrolysis oil can be used as heating oil and as a fuel for heavy equipment. The plants would be processed into wood chips or pellets that would in turn be used as the biomass fuel for the pyrolysis process.

The technology is not a new breakthrough—other companies have used pyrolysis (a process that utilizes intense heat and pressure in an oxygen-free environment to extract fuel oil from biomass) to produce heating oil-friendly biofuel before. What’s remarkable about Clenergen’s announcement is the cost-effectiveness of the process. At a time when biodiesel heating oil and other biofuels tend to be more expensive than their fossil fuel-based counterparts, the entire green fuels industry is racing to create a product that can be mass produced at a cost that is equal to or lower than the cost of producing hydrocarbon fuels. According to Clenergen’s press release:

The high yield per acre of biomass will reduce the cost of production significantly and is expected to produce a fuel oil substitute at costs that are at least 25% less than petroleum-derived fuel oils.

Assuming the company’s estimate is accurate, the 25 percent discount for heating oil producers could provide a huge boost to the commercial attractiveness of pyrolysis oil and allow it to eventually take over a significant section of the heating oil market. The company plans to draw biomass plants from supply operations in South America, Africa, and the Philippines.

The pyrolysis oil produced by Clenergen still has a long way to travel before it reaches the US heating oil market—the press release marks only the signing of the agreement between Clenergen and its collaborators. The next step will be “feedstock tests” scheduled for completion by August of this year, followed by “a Front-End Engineering Design Study” that will lay the foundation for construction of pyrolysis production facilities. Given all of the testing, preparation, and construction that remain to be done, it will likely be two years or more until Clenergen’s green heating oil product is available on wholesale or retail markets.

Nevertheless, Clenergen’s announcement is great news for the heating oil industry. Another clean, renewable heating oil product in addition to biodiesel heating oil (also known by its brand name, Bioheat) on the market, and an affordable one at that, will help bring down costs for dealers and consumers alike while reducing emissions and dependence on foreign oil. Demand for such green products will undoubtedly increase in the next few years, as more and more states implement low-sulfur and biodiesel requirements for heating oil.

Wind power could be the future of Maine’s energy, but the Maine Energy Marketers Association thinks that decision should be left to consumers. (image: consumerenergyreport.com)

Maine’s suppliers of heating oil, propane, and other heating and transportation fuels have taken issue with “recent headlines” that cast them as opponents of offshore wind power, and the president of the Maine Energy Marketers Association, Jamie Py, penned an op-ed for Thursday’s Morning Sentinel that explained the group’s position.

The Maine Energy Marketers Association appears to have in mind a March 12 article in the Portland Press Herald that carried the headline, “Oil Dealers: Offshore Wind Plan a Mistake.” According to the Press Herald, heating oil dealers were the primary opponents at a hearing that debated the “bold” and “futuristic” plan to convert much of Maine’s energy use from fossil-fuel sources to electricity produced by offshore wind turbines.

Py insists that Maine’s energy marketers are not opposed to the development of offshore wind power as such; rather, they object to one specific provision of an offshore energy bill (LD 1810, Act to Implement the Recommendations of the Offshore Energy Task Force) that would allocate taxpayer money to incentives for residents to convert their heating systems from heating oil, propane, or natural gas to electricity.

Py lays out three objections to the provision: it would encourage people to convert to an energy source (electricity) that is more expensive than heating oil, it would harm the energy marketers who employ 12,000 people in Maine, and it would reduce consumers’ ability to make their own choices about how to spend money on their heating systems.

Price is always a major concern for consumers, and according to Py the current electricity rate is 15 cents per kilowatt-hour, which is the equivalent of $5.25 for a gallon of heating oil—well above the average cost that Py quotes for 2010 so far, which is $2.80 a gallon. Electricity produced by offshore wind power could carry even higher costs.

The Maine Energy Marketers Association is, of course, concerned about its own well-being, but Py makes the case that Maine’s energy marketers are an important part of the state’s economy. Energy marketers provide 12,000 jobs while offering a variety of heating options for consumers (heating oil, propane, wood biomass, biofuels), and support the development of homegrown biomass and biofuel industries. Py also points to developments in the heating oil industry—more efficient heating equipment, the increasing use of biodiesel blends for home heating—to support his claim that the carbon emissions from heating have already been cut by 40 percent in the last 30 years, and could be cut by an additional 20 to 40 percent.

Lastly, Py opposes the use of subsidies to promote electric heat, and argues that it takes the choice out of consumers’ hands. Whether heating oil or electricity heats Maine’s homes in the future should be up to residents who “should be able to make that choice based on competition in the market.”

Proponents of the wind power bill have rejoinders to all of Py’s objections. To them, the widespread use of heating oil makes Maine residents victims of price fluctuations in the oil markets, and the investment in wind power will create jobs and revenue that would offset jobs and revenue lost by energy marketers.

Because no one can say for sure what prices will be in the future—whether Mainers heat with heating oil or electricity—it’s nearly impossible to say what the long-term impact could mean for heating oil users’ bottom lines. Wind power advocates worry about soaring oil prices and think that wind power, with some initial help from subsidies, can become an affordable and renewable source of home heating. They could be right. But they could also be wrong.

If Maine does embark on a widespread shift from home heating oil to electric heat, the transition is bound to be painful and lead to higher energy costs, even with incentives. Whether those prices would ever come down is anyone’s guess.

President Obama gives a speech on energy security at Andrews Air Force Base on Wednesday. (image: nytimes.com)

In a speech delivered at Andrews Air Force Base in Maryland, President Obama announced that the Interior Department would lift bans on oil and natural gas drilling off the coast of the southeastern US and parts of Alaska. Along with the announcement, Obama made a clear effort to cast his decision as a middle road between unchecked drilling and a blanket ban on drilling expansion. Details of the policy reported on Wednesday by the New York Times support this characterization: vast areas of the Atlantic ocean, a section of the Gulf of Mexico, and select areas off the coast of Alaska will be opened, while waters along the entire Pacific US coast and other Alaskan coastal regions will remain off-limits.

In his speech, Obama referred to the compromise decision as a product of careful deliberation on America’s energy security and future energy resources. As such, he tied expanded drilling to an increase in renewable energy use, saying that both resource categories were required to meet US energy needs. “We have less than 2 percent of the world’s oil reserves. We consume more than 20 percent of the world’s oil,” he explained. “And that means drilling alone cannot come close to meeting our long-term energy needs.”

A White House press release offered a more general statement from the President on that subject:

I want to emphasize that this announcement is part of a broader strategy that will move us from an economy that runs on fossil fuels and foreign oil to one that relies on homegrown fuels and clean energy. And the only way this transition will succeed is if it strengthens our economy in the short term and the long term. To fail to recognize this reality would be a mistake.

As proof of this broad and balanced approach, Obama made two announcements on the energy efficiency of vehicles along with the allowance of expanded drilling. In just a few days, he said, the White House would unveil higher fuel efficiency standards for vehicles sold in the US that would amount to saving “1.8 billion barrels of oil.” In addition, the president announced that the federal government would “lead by example” and vastly expand its use of hybrid vehicles:

In order to save energy and taxpayer dollars, my administration—led by Secretary Chu at Energy, as well as Administrator Johnson at GSA—is doubling the number of hybrid vehicles in the federal fleet, even as we seek to reduce the number of cars and trucks used by our government overall.

The Navy’s energy security logo on the F18 fighter jet scheduled to be “the first plane ever to fly faster than the speed of sound on a fuel mix that is half biomass.” (image: navy.mil)

After he emphasized the “sensible” and middle-of-the road nature of the new energy policies, Obama drove home his view of why it is important. He touched on the issues of energy independence and efficiency in the context of national security. He lauded the US Armed Forces for their leadership in energy efficiency, citing huge investments in efficiency measures this year, and pointed to an Air Force F18 fighter jet parked behind him.

This navy fighter jet, appropriately called the Green Hornet, will be flown for the first time in just a few days, on Earth Day. If tests go as planned, it will be the first plane ever to fly faster than the speed of sound on a fuel mix that is half biomass.

As is expected in all major political statements in our current economic climate, Obama peppered his speech with references to energy initiatives creating jobs and growing the national economy. He began his remarks by congratulating his administration on making the “largest investment in clean energy in our nation’s history,” and said the investment was “expected to create or save more than 700,000 jobs across America.” He repeated previous statements that a robust green energy industry in the US is crucial to America’s economic recovery.

Finally, Obama used his administration’s moderate approach to the issue to urge Congress to act on energy reform. He closed his speech with a broad call to action:

I think that we can break out of the broken politics of the past when it comes to our energy policy. I know that we can come together to pass comprehensive energy and climate legislation that’s going to foster new energy—new industries, create millions of new jobs, protect our planet, and help us become more energy independent. That’s what we can do. That is what we must do. And I’m confident that is what we will do.

For American consumers, the new drilling policies will not change much, at least at first. The allowance of drilling in new areas does not mean drilling will begin in the next few years, if at all. According to analysis from the Times, “Much of the oil and gas may not be recoverable at current prices and may be prohibitively expensive even if oil prices spike as they did in the summer of 2008.” The new policy gives oil and natural gas companies the option of drilling in a wider swath of territory, but offers no incentives to begin drilling activity. The lower prices and increased domestic production claimed by drilling supporters, which have been contested by many sources, including the Department of Energy, would not be realized for at least five years, and probably more.

The stricter vehicle efficiency standards will deliver cost savings to American drivers by requiring them to buy less fuel. As Obama put it, “new standards…will reduce our dependence on oil while helping folks spend a little less at the pump.” However, these requirements will only apply to new vehicles and probably won’t go into effect for a few years, so it will only be the new car owners of tomorrow that will see the benefits of higher fuel efficiency mandates.

“Bioheat” is a registered trademark of the National Biodiesel Board—and don’t you forget it. (image: biodieselmagazine.com)

The National Biodiesel Board (NBB) reached a settlement in its lawsuit against a New Hampshire company that had used the term BioHeatUSA to market wood burning heating systems, reported Biodiesel Magazine. Paul Nazzaro, petroleum liaison for NBB, called the settlement “a win for the environment, the industry and consumers using cleaner burning Bioheat heating oil.”

“Bioheat” has been a registered trademark of the NBB since 2006, and the trademark was licensed to the National Oilheat Research Alliance (NORA) so that NORA could make it available to retail and wholesale heating oil dealers. The term is used to refer to heating oil blended with biodiesel.

Earlier this year the NBB filed the lawsuit against Tarm USA Inc., which was marketing wood burning heating systems under the name BioHeatUSA. In the settlement, Tarm USA Inc. agreed to stop using the name within six months, and to stop using a domain name that included the Bioheat name.

“We are dead set on protecting the Bioheat identity,” said Nazzaro. “Protecting the Bioheat trademark is about protecting the integrity of the product on behalf of the entire industry and the more than 300 dealers who offer the fuel.”

As NORA’s website states, the purpose of the trademark is to create a “name that consumers will understand and recognize” for the environmentally friendly blend of heating oil and biodiesel. In the confusing welter of names trying to showcase green bona fides—biodiesel, biofuel, biomass—the heating oil and biodiesel industries want to distinguish their product from others. It’s especially important when biodiesel, the type of biofuel compatible with heating oil that’s derived from many different sources (such as waste cooking oil) avoid the problems and controversies—namely, the potential that biofuel feedstocks compete with food sources for land and create more carbon emissions than fossil fuels—that have hampered the development of other biofuels.

The biogas-burning community of Fenghuang is in China's Sichuan Province. (image: z.about.com)

As China’s economy continues to grow at a breakneck pace, so does its thirst for energy. To meet this exponential increase in demand, China has turned primarily to coal, a dirty but cheap natural resource that the nation possesses in abundance. Coal powers the vast majority of China’s electrical plants, and is also used by millions of rural homes as a cooking and heating fuel. The industrial and residential burning of massive amounts of coal releases CO2 and other byproducts that contribute to global warming and adversely affect respiratory health.

For its part, one rural village in China’s Sichuan province has found a green energy source that replaces coal for its heating and cooking needs: biogas. As Reuters reported on March 4, the farming community has pioneered a system in which local plant waste is processed into biogas that is then piped into residents’ homes for heating and cooking. The biogas is similar to methane (which is the main component of natural gas) and is derived from the fermentation of biomass such as grasses or corn stalks. Combustion of biogas produces far fewer greenhouse emissions and none of the particulate emissions that come from burning coal.

While intense demand for electricity in China’s urban centers requires burning coal, wide availability of biomass and heavier reliance on gas fuel holds promise for expanding biogas use in China’s rural areas.

Perhaps if biogas proves to be a success throughout rural China, we could see biogas use growing in the rural US.

Watch a video of the Reuters report from New Tang Dynasty Television:

[There is a video that cannot be displayed in this feed. Visit the blog entry to see the video.]

Gas flare (r.) and example of a gas-to-liquid reactor (l.) that can fit on a FSPO vessel. It looks like a chemical processing plant dropped onto a raft. (image: epmag.com and r3sciences.com)

Brazilian oil company Petrobras is aggressively financing technology that will convert flare gas, a byproduct of oilfield production so named because it is commonly disposed of by continuous burning during drilling operations, into a synthetic and commercially viable form of crude oil.

It may seem surprising that natural gas, a valuable natural resource, is emitted in great quantities as a consequence of oil extraction only to be thrown away like garbage. When underground oil is subjected to high pressure, gas dissolved in the liquid escapes through a separate pipeline valve that reaches the surface. Yet, the practice of combusting this “associated gas” as quickly as possible (i.e. gas flaring) has become standard for decades in oilfields too remote from potential markets or transport infrastructure to take advantage of the fuel’s value. Official estimates place the global amount of gas squandered in this way annually at ¼ of the natural gas consumption in the US. Though technology does exist for converting this gas into liquid crude oil, initiatives pursued by Petrobras-financed companies Compact GTL (UK-based) and Velocys (Ohio-based) aim to create equipment compact enough to fit on Floating Production Storage and Offloading vessels used in offshore drilling.

Layers (top) separating the Tupi oilfield from the water's surface. For reference, keep in mind that the world's tallest building (bottom), the Burj in Dubai, is just under 1000 meters. (image:oildrum.com and amitbhawani.com)

The ability to conduct a gas-to-liquid process onboard drilling modules is very attractive to Petrobras, which this year plans to begin production on Tupi, the world’s largest oilfield that just happens to sit underneath 2 kilometers of water and 4-5 kilometers of rock and salt. The project is almost prohibitively expensive, and converting superfluous gas to oil would be a critical offset for the expected losses that come from poking holes in the wrong parts of the seabed, a necessary part of locating a drill location.

Thinking big, it’s logical that oil from surplus gas could supplement profits for unconventional oil projects such as shale oil and oil shale, of which the world will only be seeing more in the future.

The development of viable gas-to-oil technology would not only provide revenue that would offset the costly trial-and-error stage of deepwater oil drilling, it would solve offshore drillers’ problem of what to do with excess gas. Since 2002, gas flaring has come under worldwide scrutiny because of its significant contribution to global warming. The World Bank’s Global Gas Flaring Reduction partnership (GGFR) estimated in 2009 that 1.5% of the world’s total carbon emissions comes exclusively from gas flaring. Any technology that reduces carbon emissions by that magnitude is a benefit for the entire planet.

German chemists Franz Fischer and Hans Tropsch in the 1920s first pioneered the science of creating liquid oil from coal, which was later extended to gas stocks. The process required reacting natural gas with hot steam to form a synthesis gas of carbon monoxide and hydrogen. When passed over a cobalt catalyst, the gaseous hydrocarbons mix with ions and grow into longer chains, forming a wax within seconds that is easily converted into diesel. Previously, large reactors were required to process the large amount of heat produced by the reaction, but companies Compact GTL and Velocys are able to build a compact system because of their use of microchannels, which allow heat to be distributed more efficiently, reducing the temperatures and reaction time involved and shrinking the size of the unit.

Synthetic oil contains less sulfur and pollutants than naturally occurring crude oil. When produced from biomass, synthetic fuel is called biofuel, but most biofuel production processes involve a chemically different and less direct method than the synfuels conversion. In the late 1970s, the development of synfuels was slated to receive $88 billion in support over 20 years from the US government, but was later cut by the Reagan administration due to low oil prices and skepticism about the technology’s effectiveness.