Cellulosic Biobutanol from Wheat Straw

I have written before that Butanol is a much more real, viable, and more serious contender as a gasoline replacement fuel than ethanol. There are many reasons for it, not least because it has high energy density, does not mix well and hence transports easily, and burns cleanly.

There are many reasons why I think biofuels still have a long way to go, esp those derived from bio-mass using enzymatic reactions. One key problem is the energy costs expended in the distillation process because the bacteria do not last in alcohol concentrations greater than 10%. hence the alcohol has to be distilled from a 90% water solution. That said, I think the scientific community (and entrepreneurial community) largely agrees that the real success of bio-enzymatic fuels will only happen when cellulosic alcohol problem is cracked. i.e. alcohol is derived by breaking down the complex lignocellulose that make up the bulk of the bio-mass available today for fermentation.

There many companies doing research on cellulosic ethanol: some with brighter futures and/or more influential backers than others. There are even more technologies still in academic labs waiting for the gestation period to be over so they cold be successfully commercialized. But here is some news on a laboratory success story on making butanol from wheat straw, a common and cheap bio feedstock available in many parts of the world. At least two problems remain: (a) reaction time in batch reactors, (b) distillation.

Cellulosic Biobutanol from Wheat Straw

from Green Car Congress by Mike Millikin

Scientists at the USDA Agricultural Research Services (USDA ARS) are exploring the production of cellulosic biobutanol from wheat straw using Clostridium Beijerinckii.

The research is part of a larger, ongoing research project: Cost-Effective Bioprocess Technologies for Production of Biofuels from Lignocellulosic Biomass.

In work to be published in the Journal of Biotechnology, Nasib Qureshi, Badal Saha and Michael Cotta achieved a rate of production of wheat straw hydrolysate to butanol of 214% over that from glucose.

Wheat straw contains about 70% complex carbohydrate that can serve as a low cost feedstock for conversion to fuel ethanol.

Clostridium beijerinckii P260 can utilize five and six carbon sugars present in cellulosic biomass and convert them to butanol. The researchers pretreated wheat straw with dilute sulfuric acid and hydrolyzed it using commercial carbohydrases to lignocellulosic component sugars (glucose, xylose, arabinose, galactose, and mannose) prior to their conversion to butanol.

Hydrolysis, fermentation, and product recovery were combined in a single step using a 2.5-liter bioreactor. Fermentation performance was enhanced by simultaneously recovering products [Acetone-butanol (AB)] from the fermentation broth by gas stripping, thereby avoiding inhibition of the end product.

The reactor operated in a fed-batch mode, and fermentation lasted for more than 500 hours.

Resources:

•  Qureshi, N., Saha, B.C., Cotta, M.A. 2007. “Bioconversion of wheat straw to butanol (a superior liquid fuel): simultaneous saccharification, fermentation, and product recovery” [abstract]. Biotechnology for Fuels and Chemicals. Paper No. 4-16.

Renewable Energy for Pakistan: Way Forward

I am attaching below an interesting article on Pakistan’s attempts to push for renewable energy. The article says all the right things about the potential of renewable energy, but I think it gives too much credit to the government on being fully alert to the energy crisis, and having a real plan to utilize renewable and distributed energy production as the way forward. Those criticizing renewable energy in the article only need to pull their head out of the sand and smell the air. They are, unfortunately, still living in the previous century.

This summer has brought terrible news regarding energy availability and access to ordinary Pakistanis. While most Pakistanis have been aware for a while that their country faces long term energy shortages, they had not expected the problem to be as acute and severe as it demonstrated itself to be this summer.

There is a severe energy shortage in Pakistan, esp in the urban areas, and most parts of the country are experiencing heavy load sheddings, i.e. periods with no electric power, designed to distribute load and conserve energy. Karachi, the major port city and industrial hub, is experiencing nearly 110 degree weather with 10-12 hours of load shedding a day in some parts. The situation has turned bleak, and even the more skeptical are re-assessing their opinion on renewable, distributed, and localized energy generation for Pakistan major population centers.

When it comes to Pakistan, an entire gambut of renewable energy sources can be considered plausible. Solar (PV and concentrator PV/thermal) and (onshore-off-shore) wind appear to make most sense, primarily given the geography and climatic conditions as well as the maturity of the technology worldwide, but biofuels, coal-to-gas and coal-to-liquid fuels, fischer-tropsch synthesis of fuels from converting biomass and biowaste to syn-gas, tidal power, small hydro, and thermoelectrics are all valid technologies to be researched and looked into. The biggest impediments, of course, remain rather similar to many other developing countries: lack of technological resources, lack of government incentives and support, mistrust of the financial sector for long term financing, inadequate infrastructure (grid quality, transportation, service & maintenance), and a centralized - somewhat corrupt - system of ownership of utilities. It is no wonder that even when utility industry was deregulated, the only thing the population learned about the process was how contracts were awarded to foreign firms without proper financial due diligence. Today, despite the utmost need for entrepreneurial activity in this critical sector for the country, people are scared to enter it fearing the corporate and political behemoths that roam the territories.

Anyhow, I am well aware that the Government of Pakistan has formulated, and distributed, a National Renewable Energy Policy document. One of these days I may actually highlight some of its key recommendations here, but for now I still keep looking for the economically feasible opportunities that could be easiest to adopt in Pakistan’s unique setting. We can probably learn a lot from across the border (India) and China. India is fast gaining serious experience in renewable energy production - not only for domestic consumption but also to become an international player in this area. Not only are rural electrification companies such as Selco have installed more than 35,000 solar PV systems, but they have also figured out a creative way to finance such projects with small-sized loans from development organizations. Another Indian company, Suzlon, is now the 5th largest wind turbine manufacturing company in the world. India today has an installed capacity of over 6.27 GW of wind power. No wonder that last year’s annual World Wind Conference took place in Delhi, India.

Karachi is Suffering in the Heat

Also published at ATP

Imagine 42 degrees celsius (107 degrees Farenheit) weather, no electricity, no fans, high humidity, no drinking water, and knee deep water on streets. Now imagine living through that for more than 24 hours. Terrible!

That is precisely what most Karachiites have been going through for more the past 2 days. A huge monsoonal storm hit the city yesterday, followed by torrential rains. And then the infrastructure of the city that had already suffered several major blows in the past 2 months simply came crashing down. The city now sits in a giant puddle, surrounded by fallen trees, billboards, traffic lights, and rooftops.

Due to the severity of the storm, several trees were pulled out of the ground and are now left stretched across streets, many large bill boards fell on top of passing cars and people, electricity wires were found dangling from the poles leading to several people dying of electrocution, roofs of poorly constructed homes fell killing the residents, rain-related traffic accidents led to further deaths, and now people are suffering without electricity and proper transportation in the maddening heat. Reports are indicating that more than 50 people have died and more than 200 have been injured in Karachi already in the aftermath of the storm. Even those who have lived in the city and watched many monsoons go by are claiming this storm to be among the worst they have weathered. It seems the first wave of the storm has passed by but the city is still struggling to play catch up from all the destruction that it caused.

Google’s massive solar complex and other clean-tech initiatives

There has been much written already about the corporate environmental leadership that Google has shown. And in his world where such leadership is almost always left wanting, it has to be complimented. Not only has Google been a part of sponsoring several cleantech initiatives especially through its Google Foundation, its founders (role-models for many) drive fuel efficient hybrids and have set clear directives for its employees to adopt more ‘green’ lifestyles.

And now the most visible display of Google’s environment-consciousness has been revealed. It is the most massive, largest corporate installation of solar panels at its Googleplex headquarters in Mountainview, CA. The majority of the solar panels (around 9212 to be exact) have been installed atop rooftops of the Googleplex and the remaining on top of the newly constructed parking Garages which also provide cords for plug-in electric vehicles. The photovoltaic solar panels have been designed and installed by a company called EI solutions, a remarkable feat in under 9 months.

The total installed capacity of this solar grid is 1.6MW. That is a big number! In one day the system generated 9,468 kilowatt-hours of electricity. This is enough electricity to power 83,000 hours of flat-screen TV viewing each day (see live Google stats on this solar installation). Google expects to save more than $393,000 annually in energy costs—or close to $15 million over the 30-year lifespan of its solar system. At this rate, the system should be able to pay for itself in roughly 7-8 years.

This is not the only way in which Google has taken a leadership stance in promoting clean energy and resource efficiency. It is already famous for having probably the largest employee density of people driving hybrid vehicles. Dr. Larry Brilliant, head of Google.org, the philanthropic arm of Google, has already announced the search engine company’s new Recharge It program—a Google.org initiative that aims to reduce CO2 emissions, cut oil use and stabilize the electrical grid by accelerating the adoption of plug-in hybrid electric vehicles and vehicle-to-grid (V2G) technology. It is estimated that commercial plug-in hybrids will be able to go ~40miles without any fuel use, which might be plenty for weekday commuting to work for most people. The gas engine will, in that case, act as a backup in case a longer trip has to be taken.

According to a news article, Google has been offering a $5,000 rebate to employees who purchase a vehicle that gets over 45 miles per gallon. That is wonderful. Nothing better than a direct cash incentive program. Hybrids, and especially the plug-in hybrids would get there. But so will diesel. In fact, with such a rebate from the employer a diesel powered vehicle would actually be cheaper than buying an ordinary low mpg gasoline car. Remember my note earlier than Honda is introducing a diesel car in the US that will get roughly 62.8mpg? Honda is not the only company introducing high fuel efficient diesel models in the US. Trust me that for long distance commutes, clean diesel powered cars will be more fuel efficient than a plug-in or gas-hybrid. The only thing sexier would be a diesel-hybrid! Now that’s what I am waiting for….

Kashif Memon: America’s Got Talent?

By now I believe most Pakistanis living in the West and access to the youtube wonder must already know about Kashif Memon’s appearance on America’s Got Talent. I am no fan of this show, but probably only because I don’t get enough time to watch TV. However, these shows, as loe and hate relationships they may evoke in their audiences, do serve some useful purpose. They are fun to watch, they allow people to see performances by amateurs who could one day make it big, and some of their contestants really do make it big!

But who is Mohammad Kashif Memon? Turns out he is a Pakistani sandwich-maker. He just made an appearance on the show and it is the HOT topic on the Pakistani blog circuit right now. All of us must have really needed a break from the monotony of bad news coming out of Pakistan regarding politics, media, electricity meltdowns etc….

Ofcourse, as a Pakistani, I find it amusing and more fun to watch Kashif than just someone else. Us Pakistanis don’t exactly show up on US TV very much (at least not in a positive light), and when we do, its a neat occasion to celebrate. I also celebrated when a Pakistani family showed up on Paris Hilton’s show! That was fun.

A clipping from his appearance is below and I would love to know what you think. His appearance is so simple, he really looks like he just walked off work in his sandwich shop and showed up to audition. His performance left me desiring for more. I have seen some absolutely fantastic dancing moves by amateurs at friends’ wedding. He would not do well in front of a Pakistani crowd - his moves are old and a bit too cheesy even for Bollywood stuff, but to a new audience (including David Hasselhof), it is new and breath-taking!

Check it out…

That said, I also want to put in a plug for one other performance at such a show that was sent to me by a friend. This is also an amateur simple guy from somewhere in England. But my God! He is sooo good!!! That video is also appended below. I love it.

CAFE (fuel economy) Standards in the USA

CAFE stands for Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE). It is the sales weighted average fuel economy, expressed in miles per gallon (mpg), of a manufacturer’s fleet of passenger cars or light trucks with a gross vehicle weight rating (GVWR) of 8,500 lbs. or less, manufactured for sale in the United States, for any given model year. Fuel economy is defined as the average mileage traveled by an automobile per gallon of gasoline (or equivalent amount of other fuel) consumed as measured in accordance with the testing and evaluation protocol set forth by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

CAFE was enacted in 1975, and there is a long winded equation of sorts that essentially spits out a CAFE number based on the kinds of cars in the fleet of an automobile manufacturer and there fuel economy performance over a test driving cycle (which itself is quite unrealistic by today’s standards). CAFE standards have recently become the joke of the town. Not least because the standards haven’t changed, and hence fleet averages really haven’t improved at all despite 30+ years lot of progress in technology (see chart). CAFE standards were put in place to mandate car makers to offer better fuel economy vehicles, but car makers have conveniently side-stepped the issue with interesting fixes. Flex fuel cars were given a much better fuel economy rating by EPA only because they consume less gasoline (and more ethanol), even though the impact on CO2 emissions is not that different. American car makers kept pumping out flex fuel cars that were only driven on gasoline and hence even though cars were registered as 33mpg vehicles under CAFE, in reality they only gave 15 mpg or so on road. [By the way: the sticker mpg on your car is completely disjointed from CAFE values of your car. It is an even more absurd value. I am sure I ma not th eonly one who has never been able to reach the fuel economy that my car-maker tells me I should reach. Its not a surprise that when an EPA administrator did not reach the high mpg advertised by her Prius, she set about a personal goal to make sure stickers read fuel economy averages closer to reality. More on that some other time.]

Anyways, a piece of news caught my eye and prompted me to write on this issue here:

Potential for Increased Emissions from Vehicles Using Ethanol as Fuel

Most gas stations that I use in Massachusetts now carry fuel with up to 10% by vol alcohol (typically ethanol). Ethanol is used in reformulated gasoline (up to 10% can be used without requiring modification to the vehicles or fuel transport systems) to increase the octane rating. MTBE was the chemical used earlier but it was found to be seeping out of fuel storage tanks into ground water, and was gradually bannd after shown to be linked to adverse health effects.

I had posted earlier about a study that linked increase in cancer mortality risk in the case of wide use of ethanol as fuel. Here is a little more information on a similar topic, i.e. potential for increase in emissions as ethanol concentrations in the fuel are increased. This time, the source is ARB which just approved the use of 10% ethanol. The concentrations being discussed below are not E85 (i.e. 85% ethanol) but just E10 (i.e. 10% ethanol addition in reformulated gasoline). I guess CARB is saying to the refineries: you can use ethanol but come up with other ways to reduce the increased emissions (and fuel economy loss) incurred by the use of ethanol biofuel.

The California Air Resources Board (ARB) approved changes to its reformulated gasoline regulations to allow ethanol blends of up to 10% (E10). ARB also approved changes to the predictive model, a tool used by oil refining companies to formulate lower-emitting gasoline in California. (California’s predictive model is analogous to the EPA’s “Complex Model” for reformulated gasoline.) Refinements to the predictive model include the greater use of ethanol.

The predictive model is a set of mathematical equations that relate exhaust rates of hydrocarbons, nitrogen oxides, and toxics to values of eight regulated properties in California’s reformulated gasoline (CaRFG). This in turn is used by refiners to assure that their fuels obtain the required emissions reductions. This gives refiners flexibility in meeting emission limits defined in ARB regulations.

If there was an India-Pakistan nuclear war…

Both Pakistan an India are among the latest entrants to the prestigious (and dubious) nuclear club. They boast of having developed nuclear weapons as a deterrent from aggression oneither. Having nuclear weapons is a crazy idea, and gets even crazier when countries with ridiculous levels of hunger, poverty and disease spend billions developing nuclear weapons, and then billions more protecting them each year. There is also always that risk of technology leaking into the hands of people who may be interested in using them outside the silly deterrent rhetoric.

If there was to be a nuclear war between India and Pakistan, I somehow doubt atmospheric soot levels would be a top priority - nor do I think military policy makers would take this into consideration when deciding on who to bomb and where.

But that said, it is clear that even a low level nuclear “accident” can cause tremendous damage to people, ecology, and the security of that region. I also don’t think this pollution potential is limited to nuclear events. I am sure a ‘relatively’ standard bombing would also have similar impacts.

Here is a recent clippingabout a scholarly study on this topic in the journal Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics.

All out Indo-Pak nuke war will release 5-mln-tonnes of carbon soot into atmosphere

 

London, June 12 : An all out nuclear war between India and Pakistan will loft up to five million tonnes of black carbon soot into the atmosphere, and drop global temperatures by 1.4 0C, a Rutgers University study has said.

As part of their study, the researchers used a climate model shared by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change to calculate the effects of exploding 100 Hiroshima sized bombs over major cities.

The team found, besides polluting the atmosphere, the radiation would shorten growing seasons in the middle latitudes. In some cases, the growing seasons would fail entirely, they said.

Low cost ways of cutting CO2 pollution

I had been looking for something like this for a while. I think the following article from The Economist is very informative. It is short, and drives the point home that we can do a lot more with less. If we just pay attention.

Irrational incandescence

SOME ways of cutting carbon are cheaper than others. So, at different carbon prices, different sorts of methods of abatement become worthwhile. Vattenfall, a Swedish power utility, has tried to quantify which ones would be worth undertaking at what price (see chart - click to enlarge)

The result is a testament to economic irrationality. The measures below the horizontal line have a negative abatement cost—in other words, by carrying them out, people and companies could both cut emissions and save money. At a macroeconomic level they would boost, rather than reduce, economic growth.

Lighting, for instance, accounts for some 19% of the world’s electricity use. A standard incandescent light bulb costs around €1, says Theo van Deursen, chief executive of Philips Lighting, and uses €15-worth of electricity a year. A low-energy one costs €5-6 and uses €3-worth. The payback on investing in a compact fluorescent bulb, therefore, is less than a year. Yet low-energy lighting makes up only 30% of Philips’s sales. Mr van Deursen admits to being disappointed. Sales are rising faster in the developing world: there, people pay more attention to electricity bills than they do in the rich world.

Economists trying to explain this apparent irrationality suggest that the savings are too small and the effort involved in change too large. People find their electricity bills too boring to think about; within companies, those responsible for keeping bills down may not have the authority to spend the necessary capital. Another explanation is the agency problem: that the developer who would have to pay higher capital costs up front will not be forking out for the electricity bills. Besides, people buy houses not because they have good insulation but because they have pretty views.

Compared with pursuing greater energy efficiency, the abatement measures into which so much money is now being poured look rather expensive. Carbon capture and storage and wind and solar power, for instance, all have positive, and relatively high, abatement costs.

But the cheapest sources of abatement are difficult for policymakers to get at. Billions of different actors are involved. They cannot be targeted in the way that a few hundred factories can. What is more, a moderate carbon price is not likely to be effective, since people clearly do not care enough about cost.

One policy option is to decouple the utilities’ revenues from the amount of electricity they sell. That gives them an incentive to increase the efficiency of power usage rather than to produce and sell extra power. California is already doing this, which is presumably why electricity prices there are among the highest in America, while consumption is relatively low.

Energy-efficiency standards, such as building regulations, are another option. Economists generally prefer to avoid rules that specify what companies can produce and how, because they require governments, rather than markets, to allocate resources, and markets tend to do a better job. But if, as in this case, a public as well as a private good is involved, and the market does not seem to be doing its job properly, there is an argument for governments giving it a nudge.

There are lots of energy-efficiency regulations in place already, and they are being tightened. Incandescent light bulbs are the top target at the moment. Both the European Union and Australia said earlier this year that they are planning to ban them. But the man in the vanguard of this green revolution is Fidel Castro, who started phasing them out two years ago.

Terrorism is Murder. Murder is Haram (in Islam).

Terrorism is Murder. Murder is Haram: These are the opening lines in the video of a new song (see website) that has been put together by some of the top pop musicians in Pakistan. The song is directed by Waseem Mahmoud and the performers include Ali Haider, Ali Zafar, Hadiqa Kiani, Haroon, Shafqat Amanat Ali Khan, Shuja Haider and Strings.

This song (in Urdu) is a response to a general perception among Pakistanis that despite us having become a target of terrorism, we are often labeled as terrorists or harbinger of terrorism ourselves. Pakistan is a country of nearly 140 million-170 million people and I think it is quite absurd for anyone to rationally think all Pakistanis are terrorists. Certainly nobody does that. But it is true that the geopolitics of the past decade, especially since the 9/11 attacks has put Pakistan straight in the path of the West’s global war on terrorism.

It is our misfortune that not only are we a poor country that has seen its share of despotic, ideological regimes, but that we are also surrounded by countries that have often offloaded their instability onto us. In addition to that, it is no hidden fact that over the past few decades we have been encouraged to promote radicalization and Islamization in our midst by other so-called strategic friends because it was the easiest way for them to gain access to ideologically brainwashed soldiers for the wars in Afghanistan (against a communist Soviet force) and India (against a communism leaning Hindu force). Pakistanis played into the hands of those orchestrating a global strategic warfare and provided the human fodder that fed the wars for decades. Only recently did we realize that the wars across the borders have come too close to us (in fact in our homes) and now we are at the danger of becoming the enemy of what we bred over the past few decades.

But Pakistanis at large do not support terrorism, nor do they support cross-border attacks, or radicalization. We are, however, an ideological country that does find its root cause for creation in the religious identity of being a Muslim in South Asia. But that is not all that we are nor what our honest history tells of us. Pakistan was a country created to suppress the fear of a religious civil war that was could have erupted in a united India after the British left. At its birth was a vision of a state where people would be free to practice their religion, muslims or non-muslims, and there was hope that Pakistan would be the re-birth of the idea that a nation-state could at the same time be modern and yet muslim in essence. Pakistan was a country that was shaped by the philosophical thought of Iqbal, the greatest muslim philosopher of the past century, and his vision was executed into reality by a rather secular Mohammad Ali Jinnah. The combination could not have been better and its a pity that we could not do better after they departed.