Evolution of New Processes and Products from Dry Grind Fuel Ethanol Processing

Transcription

1 Evolution of New Processes and Products from Dry Grind Fuel Ethanol Processing Kurt A. Rosentrater, Ph.D. Department of Agricultural and Biosystems Engineering Iowa State University (515)

2 OVERVIEW 1. Ethyl alcohol 2. Coproducts 3. Ongoing research 4. New opportunities 5. Concluding thoughts 2

3 ETHYL ALCOHOL 3

4 Ethyl Alcohol The Fuel of the Future 1860 Nicholas Otto (b. 1832, d. 1891), a German inventor, used ethanol to fuel an internal combustion engine 1896 Henry Ford s (b. 1863, d. 1947) first automobile, the quadricycle, used corn-based ethanol as fuel 1908 Hart-Parr Company (Charles City, IA) manufactured tractors that could use ethanol as a fuel Henry Ford s (b. 1863, d. 1947) Model T used corn-based ethanol, gasoline, or a combinations as fuel 1918 World War I caused increased need for fuel, including ethanol; demand for ethanol reached nearly 60 million gal/year 1940 The U.S. Army constructed and operated a fuel ethanol plant in Omaha, NE Ethanol was extensively used as a motor fuel additive prior to the end of World War II (ca. 1933) 4

5 Ethyl Alcohol The Fuel of the Future The first distillation column for the production of fuel ethanol was invented by Dennis and Dave Vander Griend at South Dakota State University in 1978/1979 5

6 DDGS Historically Many people have asked what the fuel ethanol industry is going to do about the growing piles of non-fermented leftovers Grain distillers have developed equipment and an attractive market for their recovered grains (Boruff, 1947) Distillers are recovering, drying, and marketing their destarched grain stillage as distillers dried grains and dried solubles (Boruff, 1952) This question has been around for quite some time, and it also appears that a viable solution had already been developed as far back as the 1940s 6

7 DDGS Historically In the 1940s / 1950s 17 lb (7.7 kg) of distillers feed was produced for every 1 bu (56 lb; 25.4 kg) of grain that was processed into ethanol Similar to today But over 700 gal (2650 L) of water was required to produce this feed (Boruff, 1947; Boruff, 1952; Boruff et al., 1943) vs. < 4 gal. of water today 7

8 GRAIN ALCOHOL DISTILLERY (ca. 1947) 8

9 MODERN DRY GRIND PROCESS 9

10 U.S. ETHANOL GROWTH Ethanol Production RFS Mandated Production Coproduct Generation Fuel Ethanol (gal) x Feb. 2011: 204 plants, 13,771 Mg/y RFS: 15,000 Mg/y of biofuel by Coproducts (t) x 10 6 Year Growth of U.S. fuel ethanol industry 10

11 Total U.S. Energy (Btu) U.S. ETHANOL GROWTH 1.2E+17 Consumption - Fossil 1E+17 8E+16 Production - Fossil Nuclear Renewable Total Consumption 6E+16 4E+16 2E Year US EIA,

12 U.S. ETHANOL GROWTH Crude Oil 37% Renewable 8% Nuclear 9% Solar, 1% Geothermal, 5% Waste, 6% Wind, 9% Biofuels, 20% Coal 21% Wood, 24% Hydroelectric, 35% Natural Gas 25% Since 1950s, generally 5 to 9 % of total U.S. US EIA, 2011 energy supply has been renewable 12

13 COPRODUCTS 13

14 ETHANOL COPRODUCTS Distillers Dried Grains with Solubles Condensed Distillers Solubles Distillers Wet Grains 14

15 Jan-80 Jan-81 Jan-82 Jan-83 Jan-84 Jan-85 Jan-86 Jan-87 Jan-88 Jan-89 Jan-90 Jan-91 Jan-92 Jan-93 Jan-94 Jan-95 Jan-96 Jan-97 Jan-98 Jan-99 Jan-00 Jan-01 Jan-02 Jan-03 Jan-04 Jan-05 Jan-06 Jan-07 Jan-08 Jan-09 Jan-10 Jan-11 Jan-12 DDGS Price ($/t) COPRODUCT PRICES Date 15

16 Sales Price ($/t) COPRODUCT PRICES Corn SBM DDGS 0 Jan-11 Feb-11 Apr-11 Jun-11 Jul-11 Sep-11 Nov-11 Date 16

17 DDGS Price Relative to (%) COPRODUCT PRICES Corn SBM 0 Jan-11 Feb-11 Apr-11 Jun-11 Jul-11 Sep-11 Nov-11 Date 17

18 Price / Unit Protein ($/ t/% protein) COPRODUCT VALUES SBM DDGS Corn Jan-11 Feb-11 Apr-11 Jun-11 Jul-11 Sep-11 Nov-11 Date 18

19 Value ($/bu corn) DDGS Value (% of total revenue) COPRODUCT VALUES Value of Ethanol ($/bu corn) Value of DDGS ($/bu corn) DDGS Value (% total) Oct-09 Jan-10 May-10 Aug-10 Nov-10 Feb-11 Jun-11 Sep-11 Dec-11 Date 19

20 COPRODUCT RESEARCH As ethanol industry grows, supply of coproducts will grow Balance = key to sustainability Livestock producers Ethanol manufacturers 20

21 ONGOING RESEARCH 21

22 ONGOING RESEARCH Fuel vs. Food vs. Feed vs. Plastics vs. Chemicals vs. Other uses Goals: Augment current uses Develop new market opportunities Develop/optimize processes and products Improve sustainability Context: Application of physics and chemistry to biological systems Manufacturing with biological polymers: proteins, fibers, lipids 22

23 ONGOING RESEARCH Material handling Pelleting/densification Aquaculture Human foods Plastic composites 23

24 MATERIAL HANDLING 24

25 MATERIAL HANDLING Sieve Opening Size (mm) Scale bar = 3.91 mm Scale bar = 2.50 mm Scale bar = 2.34 mm Scale bar = mm Scale bar = mm Scale bar = 0.52 mm Scale bar = 0.36 mm Scale bar = 0.26 mm 25

26 0.841 Particle Diameter (mm) 1.19 Plant MATERIAL HANDLING Carbohydrate Protein Batch 1 Batch

27 Mass Flow Rate (g/min) MATERIAL HANDLING z= a + bx + cy x= AoR ( ) y = HR (-) z= MFR (g/min) R 2 = 0.99 Error= HR (-) AoR ( o ) MFR < 100 = Poor Flow 100 < MFR < 120 = Fair Flow MFR > 120 = Good Flow Good flow Fair flow Poor flow 27

28 Moisture Content (% db) MATERIAL HANDLING AoR ( o ) HR (-) z= a + b/x + cy x= AoR ( ) y = HR (-) z= Moisture content (%, db) R 2 = 0.71 Error= 4.50 Moisture < 9.9 (Good Flow) 9.9 < Moisture < 17.5 (Fair Flow) 17.5 > Moisture (Poor Flow) Good flow Fair flow Poor flow 28

29 CC/Dispersibility * d/f (-) MATERIAL HANDLING y = x R 2 = Plant Plant 2 Plant 5 y = 2E-11e x R 2 = Plant 4 Plant PBD/ABD (-) 29

30 PELLETING/DENSIFICATION 30

31 PELLETING/DENSIFICATION Mag. x 10 DDGS A Mfg B

32 Total Slack Cost per Car, SCcar ($/car) Pelleting Cost per Car, Pcar ($/car) PELLETING/DENSIFICATION a $50/ton DDGS Sales Price, s $100/ton DDGS Sales Price, s $150/ton DDGS Sales Price, s $200/ton DDGS Sales Price, s 15 $/ton pelleting cost, Cop $/ton pelleting cost, Cop $/ton pelleting cost, Cop Percentage of DDGS Pelleted, p (%) Resulting slack costs and costs of pelleting for each rail car due to differing DDGS sales prices and annualized pelleting cost a) breakeven occurs at points of intersection 32

33 Total Slack Cost per Car, SC car ($/car) Pelleting Cost per Car, Pcar ($/car) PELLETING/DENSIFICATION 1500 $50/ton DDGS Sales Price, s $100/ton DDGS Sales Price, s $150/ton DDGS Sales Price, s $200/ton DDGS Sales Price, s 10 $/ton pelleting cost, Cop 15 $/ton pelleting cost, Cop 5 $/ton pelleting cost, Cop b Percentage of DDGS Pelleted, p (%) Resulting slack costs and costs of pelleting for each rail car due to differing DDGS sales prices and annualized pelleting cost b) magnification of the intersections clearly shows the proportion of DDGS which needs to be pelleted to achieve breakeven 33

34 p (%) p (%) PELLETING/DENSIFICATION s ($/ton) Cop ($/ton) Percent of DDGS pelleted, p (%), required to achieve breakeven increases as both DDGS Sales Price, s ($/ton), and Pelleting Cost, Cop ($/ton), increase 34

35 AQUACULTURE Nile tilapia Yellow Perch Rainbow Trout 35

36 Relative Feed Cost ($/tonne) AQUACULTURE DDGS ~ 1/10 to 1/20 the price of fish meal Tilapia Perch Trout FM: 1000 $/tonne FM: 2000 $/tonne DDGS: 100 $/tonne % Fish Meal Replaced 36

37 Low-fat DDGS DDGS HUMAN FOODS Diabetic and Celiac patients High protein, high fiber, low starch 37

38 HUMAN FOODS Flat breads Chipathi Southern Asia Similar to tortilla Naan Northern India and near East Tandoori clay ovens ~ F Barbari Persian Brick-lined ovens ~ 480 o F 38

39 PLASTIC COMPOSITES Phenolic resin & DDGS DDGS Biodegradability Durometer Hardness Density Water Absorption (mass %) (%) (mass % degraded) (Shore D) g/cm 3 (lb m /ft) 2 hour 24 hour one week ± 0% 93 ± 2% 1.20 (75.2) ± 52% 0.1 ± 0% 0.2 ± 0% 0.5 ± 0% ± 12% 82 ± 2% 1.24 (77.5) ± 15% 1.6 ± 1% 2.8 ± 3% 7.9 ± 8% ± 10% 72 ± 3% 1.23 (77.0) ± 35% 5.0 ± 2% 13.2 ± 5% 29.4 ± 9% ± 6% 68 ± 3% 1.22 (76.4) ± 41% 6.2 ± 3% 15.9 ± 8% 33.5 ± 17% 39

40 Relative Biodegradability Ultimate Tensile Strength, psi MPa PLASTIC COMPOSITES Polylactic acid (PLA) & DDGS % DDGS % DDGS % DDGS 0 50% ground 35% raw 25% ground 0% white pine 0 25% raw 25% ground 10% raw 10% ground 0% 0 10% DDGS 0% DDGS DDGS Level (%) Property Ultimate tensile stress (UTS) psi (MPa) (61.3) (44.7) (28.2) (23.3) (22.7) Break stress psi (MPa) (60.4) (44.4) (23.8) (21.0) (19.9) Young s modulus 270, , , , ,140 psi (MPa) (1866) (2097) (1918) (1736) (2104) Flexural modulus 342, , , , ,872 psi (MPa) (2363) (2254) (2331) (2331) (2074) Elongation to UTS, % Elongation to break, % Hardness Shore D

41 PLASTIC COMPOSITES 41

42 PLASTIC COMPOSITES 42

43 NEW OPPORTUNITIES 43

44 NEW OPPORTUNITIES Evolving processes Fractionation Biorefining / bioprocessing Anaerobic digestion Integrated systems 44

45 EVOLVING PROCESSES Wet vs. dry coproducts DDGS vs. DWGS Oil extraction from stillage (40-60 cents/lb) ~ 10% down to 8-9% fat Every 1% fat reduction = $3-$6 /ton finisher diet increase Jan. 2012: 47% of plants extracting oil 45

46 EVOLVING PROCESSES Corn oil Corn oil 46

47 EVOLVING PROCESSES 47

48 LOW FAT DDGS Properties of low fat DDGS Plant 1 Plant 2 Plant 3 Protein (%) Protein (%) Fiber (%) Ash (%) Bulk Density (kg/m 3 ) Packed Bulk Density(kg/m 3 ) AoR

49 LOW FAT DDGS 8% Fat 8% Fat

50 LOW FAT DDGS Removal of corn oil does not change flow properties of DDGS Biggest obstacles Variability / consistency Syrup addition Drying conditions 50

51 FRACTIONATION High-value components Coproducts Component Fractionation Mid-value components Low-value components 51

52 FRACTIONATION High-Value Animal Feed Human Foods Chemicals Neutraceuticals High-value components Biofuel Coproducts Component Fractionation Mid-value components Livestock Feed Low-value components Plastic Composites Recycling / Reuse within plant Biofuels Energy Landfill Other Intermediates 52

53 HIGH-PROTEIN DDGS Manufacturer Product Type of Fractionation Crude Protein Crude Fat Crude Fiber ADF NDF Ash Reference Poet Dakota Gold BPX DDGS No fractionation Dakota Gold, 2009a Dakota Bran Pre-fermentation Dakota Gold, 2009b Dakota Germ - Corn Germ Dehydrated Pre-fermentation Dakota Gold, 2009c Dakota Gold HP DDG Pre-fermentation Dakota Gold, 2009d FWS Technologies Enhanced DDGS Pre-fermentation FWS, 2009 Renessen Enhanced DDG(S) Pre- / postfermentation Stern, 2007 Solaris Energia Pre- / postfermentation Lohrmann, 2006 Glutenol Post-fermentation Lohrmann, 2006 Neutra-Fiber Pre-fermentation Lohrmann, 2006 NeutraGerm Pre-fermentation Lohrmann, 2006 ProBran Pre- / postfermentation Lohrmann,

54 FRACTIONATION a) Original DDGS; b) big DDGS; c) pan DDGS Big Original Pan Property Mean St Dev Mean St Dev Mean St Dev Protein a a b 0.21 Lipid 8.65 a b c 0.01 Ash 4.70 a a b 0.01 Carbohydrate a a b 0.21 ADF a b a 0.07 NDF a b c

55 FRACTIONATION DDGS fiber Protein: 21% Lipid: 1.7% Fiber: 52% Ash: 4.0% 55

56 Glucose Arabinose Succinic Acid Lactic Acid 2.27 g/l Ethanol Xylose/Galactose/Mannose Glucose Xylose/Galactose/Mannose Arabinose Succinic Acid Lactic Acid 5.59 g/l FRACTIONATION MW kda CDS CDS Ghost Glycerol Lane MW kda Thin Stillage Thin Stillage Ghost Glycerol Lane

57 Gas (psi) BIOREFINING DDGS H 2 O Makeup H 2 O Recycle NH 3 Recycle Compressor Biomass pump mix Reactor NH 3 Makeup P Separation Treated DDGS NH DDGS Blank Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 3 Sample 4 Sample 5 Sample 6 17 Blank 15 2/27/2008 9:50 2/27/ :26 2/27/ :02 2/27/ :38 2/28/2008 0:14 2/28/2008 3:50 In vitro true DM digestibility (TDMD) 2/28/2008 7:26 2/28/ :02 57

58 BIOREFINING 58

59 BIOREFINING 59

60 Methane Potential (%) ANAEROBIC DIGESTION % Sucrose Blank DDG DDGS Thin Stillage Whole Stillage CDS Cumulative biogas and average methane Potential methane production 60

61 Anaerobic Digester INTEGRATED SYSTEMS Biofuel Refinery 61

62 INTEGRATED SYSTEMS 62

63 CONCLUDING THOUGHTS Coproducts key to economic viability of renewable fuels Many opportunities to increase value and utility Several keys to sustainability 63

64 THANK YOU Questions? Comments? Kurt Rosentrater Department of Agricultural and Biosystems Engineering Iowa State University (515)