Category Archives: alternative energy

4 minutes with…Lynn L. Bergeson, Managing Partner, Bergeson & Campbell

LynnBergeson_180LynnBergeson_180Tell us about your organization and it’s role in the advanced bioeconomy.

Bergeson Campbell, P.C. focuses on chemical product regulation, including renewable and biobased products regulated under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), emerging chemical product technologies (bio, nano, and synthetic biology), and related international chemical regulatory programs.

Tell us about your role and what you are focused on in the next 12 months.

As Managing Partner of BC and President of our consulting affiliate, The Acta Group, my job is to identify emerging trends, evolving markets, and growth areas and align our services and professionals to meet these new challenges.

What do you feel are the most important milestones the industry must achieve in the next 5 years?

Enact and implement TSCA reform; define and reward more systematically sustainable business practices, particularly in the chemical sector; and reduce GHG emissions.

If you could snap your fingers and change one thing about the Advanced Bioeconomy, what would you change?

I would resource federal agencies, EPA, USDA, DOT, USTR, with adequate funding to understand more deeply the interplay between evolving technologies, particularly renewable chemical products and sustainability. Federal agencies are committed to the goals of the Bioeconomy, but lack the resources to implement it.

Of all the reasons that influenced you to join the Advanced Bioeconomy industry, what single reason stands out for you as still being compelling and important to you?

The clear alignment between sustainable business practices and the importance of renewable feedstocks, which the Advanced Bioeconomy promotes better than any entity.

Where are you from? 

Grosse Point, MI

What was your undergraduate major in college, and where did you attend? Why did you choose that school and that pathway? 

Philosophy, MSU. A prequel to law school.

What’s the biggest lesson you ever learned during a period of adversity?

Never give up.

What hobbies do you pursue, away from your work in the industry? 

Hunter/jumper, Dressage riding, and maintaining a horse farm.

What 3 books would you take to read, if stranded on a desert island?

The Goldfinch, Donna Tartt
Pride and Prejudice, Jane Austen
Any John Grisham novel

What books or articles are on your reading list right now, or you just completed and really enjoyed?

Uncertain Justice: The Roberts Court and the Constitution, Laurence Tribe (enjoyed may be a bit generous).

What’s your favorite city or place to visit, for a holiday?

My farm.

Global Investment for Climate Change Falls Again

According to a new report from Climate Policy Initiative, global investment in activities that reduce the threat of climate change fell for the second year in a row from USD $359 billion in 2012 to USD $331 billion in 2013. The report, “Global Landscape of Climate Finance,” found while public sources and intermediaries contributed $137 billion, private investment dropped by $31 billion (all numbers USD).

Global Landscape of Climate Finance 2014The study found that the decrease in private funds was due largely to falling costs of solar PV. Solar development costs were down $40 billion in 2013 as compared to 2012. However, the report states that the situation remains grave: The International Energy Agency (IEA) estimates that an additional $1.1 trillion in low-carbon investments is needed every year between 2011 and 2050, in the energy sector alone, to keep global temperature rise below two degree Celsius. In other words, the world is falling further and further behind its low-carbon investment goals.

Climate finance spending was split almost equally between developed (OECD) and developing (non-OECD) countries, with $164 billion and $165 billion respectively. Nearly three-quarters of all spending was domestic: It originated in the country in which it was used. Private actors had an especially strong domestic investment focus with $174 billion or 90 percent of their investments remaining in the country of origin. These figures illuminate a bias by private investors toward environments that are more familiar and perceived to be less risky. However, public sector money made up the vast majority of developed to developing country flows, which fell by around $8 billion from the previous year to between $31 and $37 billion in 2013.

“As policymakers prepare a new global climate agreement in 2015, climate finance is a key ingredient to bring the world on a two degree Celsius pathway. Our analysis shows that global investment in a cleaner more resilient economy are decreasing and the gap between finance needed and actually delivered is growing,” said Barbara Buchner, senior director of Climate Policy Initiative and lead author of the study. “Our numbers demonstrate that most investment is happening at the national level with investors favoring familiar environments they perceive to be less risky. This implies that domestic policy frameworks and appropriate risk coverage are critical to encourage investment.”

Massachusetts Offshore Wind Auction Announced

The Department of Interior’s Secretary Sally Jewell along with Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick and Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) Acting Director Walter Cruickshank have announced that more than 742,000 acres of offshore Massachusetts will be offered for commercial wind energy development. The auction will take place on January 29, 2015.

“Thanks to the leadership of Governor Patrick and the Commonwealth of Massachusetts and the hard work of BOEM staff members, this will be our largest competitive lease sale to date for offshore wind energy development,” said Jewell. “This sale will triple the amount of federal offshore acreage available for commercial-scale wind energy projects, bringing Massachusetts to the forefront of our nation’s new energy frontier.”

MASS offshore wind auction areaAccording to an analysis prepared by the U.S. Department of Energy’s National Renewable Energy Laboratory, if fully developed, the area being offered could support between 4 and 5 gigawatts of commercial wind generation. Twelve companies have qualified to participate in the auction for the Massachusetts Wind Energy Area.

“Over the past five years, the Commonwealth has worked with its federal, state, tribal, industry and community partners to put the infrastructure and planning pieces in place to make Massachusetts the launch pad for the U.S. offshore wind industry,” said Governor Patrick. “This offshore wind energy area not only has the capacity to generate enough electricity to power half the homes in Massachusetts, but it will create local jobs and a renewable and home-grown source of power.”

The Massachusetts Wind Energy Area starts about 12 nautical miles offshore. From its northern boundary, the area extends 33 nautical miles southward and has an east/west extent of approximately 47 nautical miles. Under the terms of the Final Sale Notice, which will be published in the Federal Register on November 26, 2014, the Massachusetts Wind Energy Area will be auctioned as four leases: Lease OCS-A 0500 (187,523 acres), Lease OCS-A 0501 (166,886 acres), Lease OCS-A 0502 (248,015 acres), and Lease OCS-A 0503 (140,554 acres).

Who’s ready for prime-time, who’s on the way? The Cellulosic biofuels survey

BD-cellulosic-readiness-2BD-cellulosic-readiness-2The Digesterati — that’s you! — look at cellulosic biofuels and viability in this detailed Digest survey. What do you think of when you think of some of the top brands — what are your expectations, and concerns?

The readers speak!

In this Digest survey, we asked you to rate a representative selection of cellulosic biofuels technology providers — primarily, which technologies you feel have are the most commercial viability, either now or some time in the future.

In this first question, we asked you to rate companies based on viability.

Don’t know

In most cases, your honest answer was “don’t know” when asked about viability. Most of these companies have a long, long ways to go in convincing you that they are viable now, or ever.

But it is clear that several made significant progress in reducing uncertainty since June — with the average “uncertainty factor” coming down by an average of 16% in the past 4 months. The strongest in that respect? POET-DSM, GranBio, DuPont, CoolPlanet and Abengoa — not surprising, since CoolPlanet and DuPont are constructing first commercial plants and POET-DSM, Abengoa and GranBio opened their first commercials in 2014.

BD-cellulosic-survey-112614-excel-1

BD-cellulosic-survey-112614-excel-1

Never will be viable

Two technologies stand out from the rest in the “never will be” department — the long-delayed Mascoma and ZeaChem projects. Just as project completion has a strong role in reducing uncertainty, project delays have an unsurprising relationship to the “never will be” bucket.

Skepticism rose for 16 of the 19 technologies as a wehole, though, showing a higher degree of tire-ticking and “show me” in readers’ minds these days. The ratings for “never will be” went up by 7 points or more for Cobalt, Fulcrum, INEOS Bio as well as Mascoma and ZeaChem.

Commercially viable, but not now

BD-cellulosic-survey-112614-excel-2

BD-cellulosic-survey-112614-excel-2

The “not now” ratings went up for 17 of the 19 technologies, but the average increase in shorter-term skepticism was only 5 percent. In many cases, the change in “not now” ratings can be seen as a migration from “don;t know” and thus in a generally positive direction, rather than a “negative migration “from “viable now” or “best in class”.

The “not now” ratings jumped the most for American Process, Coo Planet, Enerkem, GranBio, INEOSBio, Iogen and ZeaChem. Beta Renewables and Abengoa bucked the tide on this question, with Beta staying in the same position and Abengoa decreasing its total for this option.

Commercially viable now

Here’s the sweet spot for technologies — the belief that they are “ready fro prime time”. But only four technologies scored over the 30 percent mark here — Abengoa, Beta Renewables, DuPont and POET-DSM, with Granbio not far behind at 24 percent.

Six technologies were big movers between June and November: Abengoa, Beta Renewables, DuPont, Enerkem, Granbio, and POET-DSM. That’s not surprising given that this is the wave of technologies opening in this momentous 12-month period for cellulosic biofuels.

Overall, seven technologies scored under 10 percent here — a warning sign that, if the technologies are in fact viable, there’s some communications to do with stajeholders: Cobalt, Cool Planet, Edeniq, Fulcrum, Green Biologics, Mascoma and ZeaChem. Absence of commercial-scale plans are the typical culprit here, although Cool Planet is an exception as a stealthy technology that has substantially advanced towards scale.

Best in Class

BD-cellulosic-survey-112614-excel-3

BD-cellulosic-survey-112614-excel-3

Nirvana indeed to be considered the best of the fleet. Interestingly in June, only 37% of voters put any of the 19 technologies surveyed into that category, and no one received higher than POET-DSM’s 7% rating. In November, POET-DSM and Beta are co-leaders with 13 percent, roughly double in both cases. But all technologies moving forward towards commercial-scale improved a lot in this category between June and November: Abengoa, DuPont, Granbio as well as POET-DSM and Beta Renewables.

Concerns

We asked, for some of the technologies, what the concerns might be for those who were skeptical and rated a technology either “not viable now” or “not viable ever”.

BD-cellulosic-concerns-1a

BD-cellulosic-concerns-1a

Options for “concern” included: Capex/opex (reported in the blue band); Feedstock costs (reported in the gold band); Feedstock availability (reported in the purple band); insufficient rates, titers, yields (reported in the green band); and viable market for the products (reported in the red band).

BD-cellulosic-concerns-1

BD-cellulosic-concerns-1

Overwhelmingly, the concerns related back to capex and opex, which were cited by 29-54 percent of respondents, and was the number one source of skepticism for every technology save one (Borregaard, for which the chief concern was rates, titers or yields).

Speaking of yields, that was the second-most cited concern for each of the 20 technologies we asked this follow-up question for.

For 10 of the 20, feedstock costs were the next most important area of concern, with 6 opting for “feedstock availability” and 4 thought that “viable market for the products” was the third most-important concern.

What do you think of when you think of a brand?

We asked a question we never had before” For each company listed below, what ONE attribute most describes that brand? In this case, we looked at five companies with technologies at commercial-scale, or under construction or in commissioning for commercial-scale.

BD-cellulosic-theonequality-1

BD-cellulosic-theonequality-1

In this case, each reader could choose only one attribute so, a low rating does not imply that this is not a brand attribute for a given company, but that it is a less compelling one than another one.

For Abengoa and DuPont, the most popular attribute was “commercially-viable”; for POET-DSM and Novozymes, the most-cited attribute was “leader”. In the case of Solazyme, the term that resonated the most was “innovative”.

See the complete results

The complete results can be viewed, here:

Wisconsin regulators back utility, sharply raise rooftop solar fees

In a decision that prompted immediate legal threats from solar industry groups, Wisconsin regulators this month approved a request by WE Energies to sharply increase fees on residential rooftop solar owners while also cutting payments for surplus power they…

 

You need to be logged in to read more.

Already a subscriber to The Energy Daily? Log in and we’ll take you where you want to go. Forgot your username/password?

Not a subscriber yet? Contact Sabrina Ousmaal to start a free trial at sabrina.ousmaal@ihs.com

Buy This Story   Already purchased this story?



SunEdison rises, diversifies with audacious First Wind purchase

In an audacious mega-deal that transforms the previously middling solar developer into a diversified renewable energy giant with new credibility on Wall Street, SunEdison Inc. and its yieldco, TerraForm Power Inc., announced last week they will buy First…

 

You need to be logged in to read more.

Already a subscriber to The Energy Daily? Log in and we’ll take you where you want to go. Forgot your username/password?

Not a subscriber yet? Contact Sabrina Ousmaal to start a free trial at sabrina.ousmaal@ihs.com

Buy This Story   Already purchased this story?



Kansas State Teaches Sustainability Through Biodiesel

kstateBiodieselStudents from Kansas State University are learning about sustainability through biodiesel. This article from the school talks about the Biodiesel Initiative, which includes converting waste oil on campus into the green fuel and using it to power equipment and trucks, in particular a truck that picks up the waste oil.

“We have a number of diesel trucks on campus that consume our biodiesel, and other smaller engines can use it as well,” said Ron Madl, K-State emeritus research professor of grain science and a leader of the Biodiesel Initiative…

Madl wanted to get students more involved in research centered on sustainability when he served as co-director for K-State’s Center for Sustainable Energy. The K-State 2025 visionary plan also emphasizes sustainability planning as a way to help K-State become a top-50 public research university.

“All universities need to teach our young people how we can have a smaller footprint going forward,” Madl said. “Getting them involved in recycling—how we do it chemically and how we do it economically—is important.”

Madl’s biodiesel biodiesel conversion lab gets some of its funding the Kansas Soybean Commission and attracts students representing many different majors, including grain science, biological and agricultural engineering, chemical engineering, chemistry and biochemistry, getting hands-on experience in making biodiesel safely.

A New Way To Finance Solar and Storage: The LOPPA

Solar and energy storage will increasingly be integrated together at commercial sites, homes and microgrids.

But to be honest, they are an odd couple with very different personalities.

Solar is passive: solar modules are typically planted in a fixed position to generate power for 20 or 30 years. You have to hose them off occasionally, but active maintenance and management reimains fairly minimal. Except for the occasional inverter glitch, lifetime energy output is also somewhat predictable.

Storage systems, by contrast, are active, continually discharging and/or charging to arbitrage pricing or balance loads. Maintenance and upgrades are part of the territory: batteries need to be swapped in and out of the system over its lifetime. The software installed with solar systems functions mostly to document power production. The software inside of storage systems functions more like a true operating system, controlling battery activity and monitoring cells for potential failure or degradation.

Most important of all, the function and “value” of a solar system is straightforward: they generate electrons. Unless the sun implodes in the near future, you understand the value of your investment with sterling precision from day one.

 Storage is deployed for demand response, smoothing intermittent renewables, reducing peak charges and frequency regulation. The same system will perform these and more functions, often in the same day. The “value” thus will vary wildly: a system used for frequency regulation will potentially earn far more revenue than one used simply to store electrons from a solar system for nighttime enjoyment. Using storage to capture solar energy for nighttime enjoyment, in fact, seems almost a futile way to use a storage system: you’re deploying a somewhat elegant, intelligent piece of equipment to replace off-peak grid power, the cheapest power you can buy. It’s like buying a BMW to only go back and forth to the convenience store.

As a result, they probably shouldn’t be sold within the same contract. Right now in solar, a growing number of customers are choosing to buy their systems through loan contracts instead of PPAs. The declining cost of solar, along with the established reliability, simply make loans a better option in most cases.

But storage? Consumers simply aren’t in a position to manage and monetize storage in an optimal fashion. Solar you can set and forget: storage you want to constantly massage.

Hence, the LOPPA, which stands for Loan PPA. Under a LOPPA, a solar system is purchased by a loan while the storage system gets installed under a PPA. The beauty is that the two payment vehicles can be combined in the same document, covering up the legal messiness with one monthly payment. The consumer gets the benefit of greater energy independence at a lower price while the solar dealer gets to earn revenue from a sale (the solar loan) a PPA and additional, incremental revenue streams.

One could imagine a wide spectrum of variants. Solar dealers, for instance, could sell a consumer a residential system under a loan and a portion or condominium interest in a community storage system. Larger storage systems can have a better ROI. It is also easier for developers to sell utilities more services through fewer systems.

There’s a good variety of acronyms too: Solo Stoppa, StoSo, etc.

Who offers LOPPA? Right now, I’m not sure. I made up the term. But creative financing has been the hallmark of the U.S. solar industry and storage is on the way. You will see contracts like this. It’s just a matter of time. 

Paralyzed by controversy, EPA delays 2014 RFS biofuel use requirements

Citing controversy over the already delayed rulemaking, the Environmental Protection Agency said Friday it will not finalize its 2014 biofuel use requirements under the federal Renewable Fuel Standard until sometime in 2015—a surprise announcement that…

 

You need to be logged in to read more.

Already a subscriber to The Energy Daily? Log in and we’ll take you where you want to go. Forgot your username/password?

Not a subscriber yet? Contact Sabrina Ousmaal to start a free trial at sabrina.ousmaal@ihs.com

Buy This Story   Already purchased this story?



NEC Agenda Available

rfa-nec-15The agenda for the 20th Annual National Ethanol Conference (NEC) is now available.

The theme for the 2014 conference, which will be held February 18-20 in Grapevine, Texas is “Gowing Global” with a focus on the export markets that are critical to the future growth and financial health of the ethanol industry.

Among the program highlights:

• Going Global: Building Ethanol Demand Internationally
• RFS and LCFS: Driving Demand or Stuck in Neutral?
• Advanced Ethanol Industry Breaks Through; Now What?
• Global Energy Market Outlook
• Global Grain Market Outlook
• The Road Ahead for Higher Blends
• How Rail Safety and Congestion are Impacting the Marketplace

As always, the agenda also includes the annual State of the Industry address by Renewable Fuels Association president and CEO Bob Dinneen, as well as the popular Washington Insiders Panel.

Early registration prior to January 30 saves $100 for both RFA members and non-members.