Trash-Based Biofuels Could Alleviate Land Use, Emissions Issues

If you haven't caught up with this news then you must have missed out.

Genesyst UK (a branch of Genesyst International Incorporated) through its direct Applied biofuels (Malta) Limited operation has stolen a march on the rest of Europe and the EU with a straight-on developments at full scale size and start  the development of the first of three major facilities in Malta to make the Renewable fuel Ethanol from Biomass (Ligno-Cellulose) from Non-Food crops thus fulfilling the issues of the European Union and the Rest-of-the-World to create Reneable fuels from truly Sustainable Sources. As I read this total investment could exceed €380 Million by 2018 produce over 400 Million litres of Ethanol and create over 800 directly employed jobs and a further 2800 indirect jobs in Malta and Gozo.

It seems now that we should look at this Company further for they have two more plans in Yorkshire UK. This must mean that they have a winning way of doing things, quietly beavering away in the background without publicity. They must have been talking to investers all along and now we assume they rae being sought by many all clamouring to join them 

Further more all of this is being carried out without the need of any financial incentives from the Government of Malta! They will I am sure be somewhat envious at the issue for they will get the benfit of being a significant producer of the Renewable Fuel Ethanol but could very well still have to export it because although the project will - on the face of the projections - produce the fuel for sale at a competitive price that could be 40% or more less than gasoline/petrol prices in Malta the use therein is not controlled to the same degree we see in Brazil for example wher Gasogol is readily for sale.

If I was Saab and Mercedes or VW or Audi now i would go hell for leather to quickly collar the market in Malta and sell my cars there to optimise the use of the ethanol Fuels and make Malta the greenest of Green Islands.

Sirs: I wondered whether you had seen this article from EurActiv (the European Union portal to events.) I have appended the article here having read same and also seen your notes..it appears lower down this response.

As you correctly state the need to use crops for the production of the renewable fuels is fast becoming a thing of the past. However to ensure that the promulgation of these is slowed the subsidies given to the production of fuels from food crops or land that should be used to grow fuel or land that is a protective barrier used to preserve ecosystems must be eliminated. It is perverse for subsidies to be given to crop growers to meet the demand of the highest bidder (fuel producers) for these (fuel producers) to then require a subsidy to make the fuels. What an absolute nonsense this is: the Public and the Taxpayer is sick and tired of this issue. No wonder they have created such a stir across the World.

Here in the EU (European Union) there are more learned approaches. This we understand is a proposal to phase out the subsidies for renewable fuels altogether, and we welcome it whole-heartedly. This phasing out of subsidies to the production of renewable fuels from crops and redirecting them to kick-start the non-food sources paying particular emphasis on waste and the phytoplankton Algae developments is a must. But we need an independent certification monitored externally (not self-certified) with nano-tracers used to record the issue. This move would fit the needs and strengthen the drive towards the more sustainable sources of renewable fuels replacing fossil-derived fuels.

Importantly though, and a message that is gradually creeping through the media, the subsidies for the production of the renewable fuels must not be the ultimate driver for their production. The validation of sale of the replacement fuel must be a like for like comparison with fossil fuels. You have had it too easy for too long in the USA with respect to transportation fuels and so an important issue needs establishing. If the raw price of oil is - say - US $70 a bbl and from that barrel we can manufacture 72 litres of petrol/gasoline then that must be the qualifying target for the manufacture of a renewable fuel. On that basis the sale price for the biofuel ethanol should be compared to that figure. So as we make 72 litres of petrol/gasoline per barrel of oil (and we assume that all the other materials produced from the same barrel of oil are of equal value - which is not exactly true) then that would cost US$35-00 (ignoring refining costs.) Adding the refining costs increases the production costs to $00-548 per litre. By using the ratios of energy as the guiding factor (ethanol fuel say is 70% thermal efficient to petrol/gasoline) then ethanol needs to be brought in for sale at under $00-384 per litre. I put it to you that this is a perfectly reasonable sales price for ethanol fuel and it is one which can be met easily with non-food sources such as the biomass found in Municipal Solid Waste, in Agricultural and Farming Debris, Industrial and Commercial Waste and from Food and Drinks Production etc. In addition it can also be manufactured from phytoplankton in Farmed Macro-Algae basins using shallow lagoons and Carbon Dioxide injection following the Israeli moves in Ashkelon - a process which can be used to sequest carbon dioxide from power stations. Further more as these sources of biomass are wasted from society it opens up the idea that they could be complimentary to some of our traditional Society practices: vegetable waste (which is often left to fester after harvesting) for instance could be collected at harvest and readily used to manufacture ethanol in the simplest of procedures.

So in the end what do we want to achieve here? Certainly a fairer system for the Public. If the Public (the Tax-Payer) sees the Renewable Fuel Industry developing in a way that does not bank-roll big business and from this they see benefits in their own pocket then fine, otherwise the skepticism will continue. It is after all possible to manufacture the renewable fuel ethanol competitively and the note which was sent to EurActiv showing what they are doing in the UK and Holland etc by using the Genesyst procedures will bear that out.

____________________________________

''Biofuels from waste will avoid use of landfill"
>Posted by Geraldine Edwards, Private citizen on March 22nd, 2010
>Organization: Private citizen
>In reaction to the EurActiv article:
>Industry chief: Biofuel from waste can reduce landfill

Sir,
>Regarding ‘Industry chief: Biofuel from waste can reduce landfill‘:
>At last we hear some good news from an enterprising source. How welcoming to read such positive comments.
>The move from Finland is not an isolated one in Europe. I have also heard that GeneSyst teams in Europe will be starting work on several major waste biomass to ethanol projects in a major roll out of projects within the next few weeks.
>In the UK this will be with Mytum and Selby Recycling at South Milford in Yorkshire. This project will initially be converting 300,000 tonnes per year, dry weight, of recovered biomass (or biowaste) from municipal solid waste to make over 90 million litres of the biofuel ethanol. It is scheduled for completion in 2012. This will be followed almost immediately with an even larger plant near Goole to convert 500,000 tonnes of biomass, again from municipal solid waste, to make up to 150 million litres of ethanol by 2013/14.
>Another plant which I understand will be privately financed is awaiting final acceptance for land apportionment is scheduled for Malta. This again will be using around 260,000 tonnes per year of recovered biomass to make over 85 million litres of biofuel ethanol. In Holland a GeneSyst project started 14 months ago and which got caught up in the banking crisis is now rescheduled to start after Easter. This project will be converting 230,000 tonnes per year of biomass from municipal and farm wastes to make over 50 million litres of ethanol by 2012.
>In the wider arena, GeneSyst facilities will also be starting in the early spring in Vietnam (Ho Chi Minh City), Kentucky and Israel.
>The programme here, though, is different to that discussed in the interview, as it uses a process known as Dilute Acid Hydrolysis - a procedure first developed in the 19th century and through the Great Wars of the 20th century but which languished due to lack of development. Under the GeneSyst development formulated by its founding engineer, James Titmas from the USA (now under development in the UK and Europe and beyond), it has been upgraded and improved using its internationally-patented Gravity Pressure Vessel.
>This means that the process is now continuous and requires no pumping or external heating and occupies a small footprint. By this innovative development the procedure uses standard off-the-shelf equipment from the water industry and traditional fermentation equipment. This means that the process is able to convert any biomass to the biofuel ethanol regardless of source and regardless of the mix - placing particular emphasis on using non-food crops. Thus it includes the biomass we throw away from society like that from municipal solid waste, food and drinks production, industry and commerce and from crops damaged by climate and seasonal factors as well as from disease. Importantly it also includes that contained in sewage sludge.
>This means that the biofuel ethanol (or indeed butanol and others) can be produced locally at the market place at a price comparable to producing ethanol from sugar crops and from starch-rich grains and food crops.
>Furthermore, because the process is water-based, it emits no odours, particulates or dust and even the carbon dioxide produced can be captured or diverted to grow farmed algae. Perhaps most significantly, here is a programme that has a low capital cost, which betters by far the destructive processes that have caused so much concern, and which can compete with existing landfill costs: surely isn’t that what taxpayers want to hear from waste managers.
>So let’s state it again in a more positive and clearer statement: Biofuels from waste will avoid the use of landfill."

In 2007, over 238,000 jobs and a boosted household income of $12.3 billion was a direct result of the ethanol industry. Increased economic activity and new jobs equated an estimated $4.6 billion in federal tax revenue and nearly $3.6 billion in state and local tax revenues.Wind, solar, biofuels, nuclear, renewable and conventional: all are part of a complete energy portfolio that America desperately needs! The emerging energy potential in this country is staggering! We need government to take the necessary steps to promote a future focused on energy security, job creation, and prosperity for America.

I'm glad to know that there is another alternative to displacing food crops! This is a creative solution, thank you for sharing this. The idea brings to mind the movie "Back to the Future".. I loved it when the Professor came back from the future and powered up his time machine with trash!! :-)

This was a very informative article about the relevance of trash and it's use for biofuel. I think it's important for the companies to understand the importance and relevance of using biodiesel fuel.