Metrics for Sustainable Technology Innovation

In today's rapidly evolving technological landscape, measuring performance is essential for sustainable technology innovation. Applying science and engineering principles to new problems drives progress and ensures technical and economic viability, while ensuring more sustainable solutions to today’s problems. Metrics provide a structured way to track these criteria, validate new technology against the competition, and report out to key stakeholders. These metrics help us evaluate reaction and separation tradeoffs, optimize reactor systems, and ensure that our processes are both economic and sustainable.  Some examples of key metrics include: 

Reactors are the heart of any chemical, biological, or electrochemical process, and scaleup of new reactor systems have their own subset of critical metrics.  By rapidly transitioning from small-scale to pilot-scale reactors, we can gather valuable data that can be used to scale directly to commercial production. Key design metrics such as mass transfer rate (kLa) and weight hourly space velocity (WHSV) are essential for optimizing reactor performance and ensuring economic viability,  and can be used as scale independent parameters to track performance at any scale. For instance, for many gas/liquid reaction systems, including gas fermentation systems, kLa (mass transfer coefficient) is evaluated to set minimum targets for commercial design, ensuring that the mass transfer rate is sufficient for economic viability. Similarly, WHSV (weight hourly space velocity) is a key measure of liquid flow per unit of catalyst, which is crucial for reactor performance.

Metrics used for design, scale-up, and operation of reactor systems in thermochemical and bioprocessing systems can include: 

Case Studies and Examples

To illustrate the practical application of these concepts, let's look at a few case studies:

1. Sustainable Bio-based base oils: Base oils are typically produced as a petrochemical fraction, and are used to produce lubricants, greases, and other heavy oils for industrial use.  In this example, metrics for reactor scale-up were applied to develop sustainable bio-based replacements for petrochemicals. The key scale-up metric used was the Reynolds Number, a dimensionless parameter that describes properties for both the liquid phase and gas phase over a solid catalyst.  Using standard guidelines for Reynolds number correlations in trickle bed reactor systems, this ensured that we could identify reactor conditions in the regime known to promote sufficient mass transfer for good performance.    
   
   
   
   

2. Biobased Monomer Production: Another example involves the production of a biobased monomer. The process rapidly transitioned from a 50 mL to a 1500 mL pilot scale, achieving a 30x scale-up. The pilot results could then be used to scale directly to commercial production. In this case, the key scaleup parameter was weight hourly space velocity (WHSV), a parameter than determines the catalyst volume needed for a given reactor performance.  The table below shows a typical scaleup plan that could be used for this type of scaleup problem. 

3. Novel Bioreactor Design: In this case, a novel bioreactor was designed for gas fermentation. The key design metric, kLa (mass transfer coefficient), was used to set performance targets and design the equipment.  Published correlations were used to evaluate the mass transfer performance vs the superficial velocity of the gas phase through the reactor system.   The minimum reactor performance determined the reactor design parameters necessary for an economic process design. 

In conclusion, metrics play a pivotal role in the successful design, scale-up, and optimization of sustainable technologies. The case studies presented in this document illustrate the practical application of these concepts, demonstrating how metrics can guide decision-making and ensure that our processes are efficient, economical and sustainable.

Navigating the Bumpy Road of Industrial Biotechnology Scale-up

We have seen a growth in products from Industrial Biotechnology, with commercial technologies emerging in areas such as:

• Fuels. Sustainable Aviation Fuel, Green Diesel, and Ethanol from low cost feedstocks

• Chemicals. Drop-in replacements for industrial chemicals such as propanediol and butanediol, made through biological routes instead of conventional petroleum based options

• Alternative routes for proteins, fats, and meat

• Materials for building projects, fabrics, electronics

The drivers for this growth include a focus on sustainability, and a drive to enable circularity through reuse of carbon and carbon-based products. Some technologies offer the potential to make use of a lower cost source of carbon, through use of waste feedstocks such as industrial gaseous emissions, biogas, end of life plastic, and waste biomass. In addition, in some cases the bioproduct is a better product than the petroleum-based version, coming with a cheaper, safer processing route and performance advantages over traditional materials.

The road we travel while commercializing new technologies like these is often bumpy, with many challenges along the way. In order to be successful we must address these challenges while also: 1) reducing technology risk 2) reducing time to market 3) optimizing/minimizing cost and 4) maximizing value.

These are often competing objectives, and usually reducing time to market and reducing risk win out. Of course, if the capital and operating cost are too high, then a new technology will not be successful, so these criteria cannot be ignored.

We can follow guidelines and best practices for the scale-up and design of industrial bioprocessing technology, to effectively de-risk and optimize new industrial biotechnology during the scale-up effort. These guidelines include elements such as:

Creative Process Engineering: The flow scheme is developed, the material balance is estimated, and key process design decisions are identified to establish the best process flowsheet for the technology.

Modeling & Analysis: A good model can save time and resources in the lab. Coupled with the right analysis, the scale-up team can prioritize objectives in the lab, pilot, and demo units.

Experimental Data: The right data is needed to prove out breakthrough ideas, secure partners and investors, and develop engineering data for equipment design. Multi-scale data is critical to this effort, and with good planning, multiple assets and external resources can be leveraged.

The key benefits of this approach are:

• Prioritization of R&D to de-risk and optimize the new technology.

• Identification of cost reduction opportunities throughout the scale-up effort.

• Anticipation of process design needs as early as possible.

While scale-up of new sustainable technology, in particular industrial biotechnology, is hard and challenging, it is not impossible! The opportunities are great, and with the right approach we will see many more success stories in the future.

Growing the Bioeconomy with Gas Fermentation

 Gas fermentation is a novel industrial biotechnology that can contribute to the growth of the bioeconomy by using low cost, readily available carbon sources such as methane, carbon monoxide, and carbon dioxide to produce various fuel, chemical and food products, such as ethanol, ethylene, triglycerides, proteins, and polyesters.

Figure 1:  Gas Fermentation Landscape

Gas fermentation has advantages over conventional processing routes, including:

·       lower cost operating conditions

·       robustness to fluctuations in feed rate and composition

·       tolerance to contaminants in the gaseous feeds. 

We can look at two classes of gas fermentation.  The first involves direct conversion of CO2 through gas fermentation, typically with hydrogen and/or oxygen as co-feeds.  A diverse array of products can be produced through these routes, including triglycerides which can be used for food, materials, and fuel applications. Chemicals such as acetic acid and ethylene are other products viable through these routes, along with single cell proteins for animal feed or other alternative protein applications. 

We can also consider gas fermentation routes that convert CO2 precursors, such as carbon monoxide or methane into useful products.  In this case, possible products include chemicals such as ethanol, methanol, or iso-propanol, and polymers such as polyhydroxyalkanoate (PHA).

However, a key challenge with gas fermentation involves the design of a cost-effective reactor system with high mass transfer coefficients for the gaseous feedstocks into an aqueous media.    A number of reactor types have been proposed to overcome this challenge, from simple bubble columns to more sophisticated air lift and external loop reactors. These reactor types have tradeoffs between mass transfer and design complexity.  It is important to identify the best option for a particular gas fermentation application. 

Figure 2:  Mass Transfer Challenge

In addition, with any biological or chemical process it is important to look beyond the reactor system and consider the integrations of unit operations both upstream and downstream of the reactor system in order to optimize the process as a whole. For gas fermentation, we may need to consider tradeoffs associated with the cost of compression or gas cleanup vs potential performance benefits in the reactor system. Similarly, we need to consider the design and performance of the product recovery section. Ultimately, we want to optimize the process not just the reactor system.

Figure 3: Process Integration Challenge

Additional challenges must be addressed when scaling and commercializing gas fermentation technology.  These include:

·       Lack of established data and models.  Compared to petrochemical reaction chemistry, the availability of data and reactor design models is quite limited. 

·       New equipment to be designed and constructed, such as custom fermenters.

·       New separation challenges.  Recovery of extracellular products such as ethanol or acetic acid from the fermentation broth, or recovery of intracellular products.

·       New optimization criteria.  Carbon footprint and ESG/LCA metrics in addition to traditional optimization metrics such as operating cost and capital cost.

·       New microbial catalysts.  As gas fermentation becomes a more mature and broadly deployed technology, methods for manufacturing and distribution of commercial scale quantities of these catalysts will be required. 

As gas fermentation becomes more mature and we see more commercial applications, opportunities for future developments will enable greater scale, reduced production costs, and new products.

·       Microbial modeling, including bacterial growth kinetics and flux models.  By bringing a more analytical approach to our gas fermentation systems, we can enhance understanding of the biological reactor systems, and develop custom reactor designs for specific microbial systems. 

·       Strain development to reduce bioproduct formation, increase contaminant tolerance, and enable more extreme operating conditions (higher temperature, for example). 

·       Reactor design and scaleup, to develop reactor systems that can enhance mass transfer while balancing constraints around capital and operating costs. 

·       New or improved approaches for product recovery to reduce the cost and complexity of product separation and purification. 

The future is bright for this exciting technology area. Gas fermentation will play a key role in the growth of the industrial bioeconomy in the coming decades. 

Guiding Scale-up of Sustainable Technologies

an interview with Michael Schultz published first at Proofing Future: Bridging People + Ideas on 15 Aug 2022

“I help companies navigate the bumpy road of scale-up, providing process development services to validate key technical concepts, optimize the right parameters, and derisk the technology. I also enjoy working with clients to build capability. Going beyond producing deliverables, I view a project as a success, if I can transfer my knowledge and learnings so that I am finally no longer needed,” says Dr. Michael Schultz, Principal at PTI Global Solutions.

Dr. Michael Schultz enjoys the challenge of solving difficult engineering problems to reduce carbon footprint and to deliver economic value. As Managing Director of PTI Global Solutions, Michael works with companies in the sustainable technology space to help accelerate commercialization, reduce risk, and get the greatest value from these great ideas. 

Previously, Michael held positions at LanzaTech, Battelle Science and Technology Malaysia, and UOP, leading process R&D and scale-up across a broad range of chemical and biological technology areas.  Michael holds a B.S. in Chemical Engineering from the University of Michigan and a Ph.D. in Chemical Engineering from the University of Massachusetts.  He received the 2015 EPA Greener Synthetic Pathway award from the US EPA and the 2005 Haden Freeman Award for Engineering Excellence from IChemE.  Mike has been granted more than 45 US Patents in his career.

Sign up to meet Michael Schultz on August 25 to discuss “Financial Instruments for Scale-up of Sustainable Technologies”

Contact Michael Schultz with your interest in Scale-up of Sustainable Technologies.

Sebastian Klemm: You recently presented “Practical Guidelines for Scale-up of Sustainable Technologies” at the Process Development Symposium in Philadelphia. What are the cornerstones of these guiding principles of yours?

Michael Schultz: The challenges with scale-up of sustainable technology are to effectively reduce the time, cost and risk of scale-up. These are often competing objectives.

Typically, the scale-up timeline is the most critical of these. Often we must accept some risk to move quickly. The key is to understand risks, mitigate where possible, perhaps with some strategic overdesign and investing in R&D at all stages of scale-up.

To effectively move quickly while managing risk, we need creative engineering, effective experimental programs with critical data gathering at each stage, and useful modeling efforts. 

Sebastian Klemm: How can you concretely support companies through scale-up challenges of new products & process technologies?

Michael Schultz: I help companies navigate the bumpy road of scale-up, providing process development services to validate key technical concepts, optimize the right parameters, and derisk the technology.

I am currently working with a company producing a novel polymer additive as they look to scale-up their technology. Having proven product manufacture at the lab scale, I am working with them to define and build their process technology at larger scales.

I also help clients better assess and understand their technology, by providing an internal engineering review of their technology, and guiding the team in a scale-up risk assessment. 

I also enjoy working with clients to build capability. Going beyond producing deliverables, I view a project as a success, if I can transfer my knowledge and learnings so that I am finally no longer needed! 

Click to visit the PTI Global Solutions website

Sebastian Klemm: How do you think the Inflation Reduction Act just passed in the U.S. can help turn the tide in favor of investing in sustainable technologies and clean energy solutions?

Michael Schultz: The Inflation Reduction Act[1] provides a number of financial mechanisms to stimulate further adoption of clean energy and sustainable technology in the United States.

The IRA is a predominately technology neutral approach, providing incentives across sectors such as power (wind, solar, nuclear), electric vehicles, transportation fuels, clean hydrogen, buildings and households. The IRA also provides much greater incentives for US manufactured content and prevailing wage requirements, providing a mechanism for US based manufacturing jobs to support this growth in clean energy.

Sebastian Klemm: Could you elaborate on how the scale-up of sustainable technologies interfaces with financial instruments?

Michael Schultz: The most successful sustainable technology scale-up efforts rely on many financial instruments to support scale-up and commercialization.

This can include grants from various public and private sources, joint development partnerships, venture capital funding, and for larger, first of its kind demonstration or commercial projects, specialized loan programs to support project capital investment.

In the past, I have provided technical due diligence support for various organizations making financial transactions in sustainable technology. This has included the US Department of Energy – reviewing applications for funding to support pilot and demonstration projects for the production of next generation biofuels, the US National Science Foundation – evaluating applications for early stage projects for sustainable chemicals, and a Special Purpose Acquisition Company (SPAC) who was pursuing an acquisition of a commercial, or nearly commercial stage company in the sustainable technology space.

I am currently working with an early stage company with a novel technology for producing petrochemical alternatives from renewable feedstocks. I am helping them develop a process design for a pilot plant, and using this as a basis to estimate a preliminary, order of magnitude capital cost. This cost estimate will enable my client to plan and evaluate options to determine the best approach for financing for this project.

For each of these assignments it has been critical for me to assess the state of the technology in question, review technical and financial projections, and provide an assessment of any technical risk that should be taken under consideration.

Sebastian Klemm: You just recently completed a book chapter themed “Process Scale-up for Bioproducts: Enabling the Emerging Circular Economy”. Which particularities and crunch points do you address?

Michael Schultz: This chapter addresses the emergence of fuel, chemical, and food products produced from biobased feedstocks, using biobased catalysis and a combination of both of these elements. Similarities and differences in the scale-up of bioproducts compared to the scale-up of more conventional thermochemical processes using petroleum-based feedstocks will be presented, along with a case study and commercial success stories for the scale-up of bioproducts.

We see opportunities to contribute to a circular economy by producing products from renewable feedstocks and waste carbon. Challenges associated with the scale-up of bioproducts include:

• the availability of feedstock

• the lack of established data and a knowledge base for these new technologies

• new optimization criteria that include metrics such as carbon intensity and other environmental, social, and governance (ESG) factors

However, with recent success stories such as the growth in drop-in, bio-based transportation fuels such as Sustainable Aviation Fuels (SAF) and renewable diesel, new bioproducts such as polylactic acid (PLA) and bio-based replacements of conventional petrochemicals such as  1,4 butanediol and 1,3 propanediol (precursors to many polymers and other materials we use every day), the future is bright for continued growth in bioproducts.

For instance, the European Bioplastics Organization estimates that the global production of bioplastics will increase from 2.4 million tons in 2021 to 7.5 million tons by 2026.[2] Production of bio-based transportation fuels[3] such as biodiesel, renewable diesel, ethanol, and Sustainable Aviation Fuel (SAF)[4] is expected to increase as well in the coming years.

Sign up to meet Dr. Michael Schultz on August 25 to discuss “Financial Instruments for Scale-up of Sustainable Technologies”

Contact Dr. Michael Schultz with your interest in Scale-up of Sustainable Technologies..

References

↑1https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inflation_Reduction_Act_of_2022↑

2https://www.european-bioplastics.org/global-bioplastics-production-will-more-than-triple-within-the-next-five-years/↑

3https://www.iea.org/data-and-statistics/charts/global-biofuel-production-in-2019-and-forecast-to-2025↑

4https://www.icao.int/environmental-protection/pages/SAF.aspx

Manage Risk While Scaling Green Chemistry

 I was pleased to speak at a webinar hosted by ViridisChem, where I spoke on ‘Managing Risk While Scaling Green Chemistry’. Follow the link to view the recording

Sustainable Fuels – an interview with Dr. Michael Schultz

Sustainable Fuels – an interview with Dr. Michael Schultz

published first at Proofing Future: Bridging People + Ideas on 5 May 2022

“I don’t think that market forces alone will do the trick. I don’t think we have a chance to meet the aggressive climate targets, if we continue to dump a pollutant, CO2, into the atmosphere without any economic penalty as we can never compete with the status quo,” says Dr. Michael Schultz, Principal at PTI Global Solutions.

Dr. Michael Schultz enjoys the challenge of solving difficult engineering problems to reduce carbon footprint and deliver economic value. As Managing Director of PTI Global Solutions, Michael works with companies in the sustainable technology space to help accelerate commercialization, reduce risk, and get the greatest value from these great ideas. 

Previously, Michael held positions at LanzaTech, Battelle Science and Technology Malaysia, and UOP, leading process R&D and scaleup across a broad range of chemical and biological technology areas.  Michael holds a B.S. in Chemical Engineering from the University of Michigan and a Ph.D. in Chemical Engineering from the University of Massachusetts.  He received the 2015 EPA Greener Synthetic Pathway award from the US EPA and the 2005 Haden Freeman Award for Engineering Excellence from IChemE.  Mike has been granted more than 45 US Patents in his career.

Contact Dr. Michael Schultz with your professional interest in Sustainable Fuels.

Register here for “Paths to Sustainable Fuels” synergy event with Dr. Michael Schultz on 31 May.

Sebastian Klemm: What is your mission with PTI Global Solutions, and how do you achieve it?

Michael Schultz: PTI Global Solutions helps companies in the sustainable technology space reduce carbon and create value by maximizing return from their best ideas, reduce the time and cost required to commercialize, and accelerate the deployment of technology to the marketplace.

I bring my experience from more than 20 years in industry, where I have had the chance to scaleup a number of new products and process technologies, helping companies work through scale up challenges.  My ultimate goal is to help these companies build this capability, rather than simply issuing reports, deliverables.                                           

Sebastian Klemm: The form of energy in any given period determines the relationship between people and nature to the extent that its production affects human habitat.[1]

Alternative fuels however need to be explored within the water-energy-food nexus – the interrelated nature of our global resource systems – as water security, energy security and food security are inextricably linked and actions in one these areas often impact one or both of the others.[2]

Why are there no easy answers to sustainable fuels? What are the challenges? 

Michael Schultz: One challenge is scale. The sheer quantities of fuel consumed every day are massive. On a global basis, we currently consume 100 million barrels of oil a day, about 4 billion gallons, or 16 billion liters.[3] It will take trillions of dollars in capital to replace the current infrastructure with infrastructure to produce sustainable fuels. To further illustrate the scale challenge, a world scale refinery such as the Reliance refinery in Jamnigar consumes 1.2 million barrels of oil a day, a scale more than 50x the largest corn ethanol plant.[4]

The second challenge is compatibility. Our transportation infrastructure is largely built around liquid fuels, with engines that have been designed for petroleum based refinery fractions.  Introduction of new, sustainable fuels, such as ethanol for gasoline engines, renewable diesel, or sustainable aviation fuel (SAF), requires extensive testing to insure compatibility with existing engines.  I believe that over time we will see custom engines designed for these sustainable fuels, but that will take time.

A third challenge is feedstock. As noted above we consume 100 million barrels of oil a day.  Feedstocks for sustainable fuels range from waste industrial gases, used cooking oil, waste biomass, and purpose grown vegetable oils. We need similar, low cost quantities of these alternative feedstocks to meet existing transportation fuel demand with alternative, sustainable liquid fuels.

It should be noted that electric vehicles solves many of these challenges. I believe we need acceleration of both pathways—broad electrification of the transportation infrastructure and sustainable, drop-in transportation fuels to have the greatest impact on CO2 reduction. 

Visit the PTI Global Solutions website

Sebastian Klemm: The fuel market has long been dominated almost exclusively by mineral oil, meaning fossil fuel extraction from the ground which when burned emits additional carbon into the atmosphere.

In Germany, the German Energy Agency dena – that acts at the interface between politics and industry – advocates the use of alternative fuels to change this situation and to reduce emissions.[5] Sustainable fuels that can substitute fossil fuel may be grouped into synthetic fuels [6] and biofuels [7].

With your expertise you enable scale-up & commercialization of low carbon energy and sustainable fuels [8]. Considering available quantities of solid municipal waste and land use required for biofuels next to space for wildlife & space for a growing global population:

What does the scalability of sythetic fuels and biofuels depend on? 

Michael Schultz: We can think about scalability for three areas. 1) Feedstock collection, distribution and processing. Whether we are collecting biomass or municipal waste, industrial off-gases, or used cooking oil or vegetable oils, each brings its own logistic challenges. The feedstock then must be conditioned for use in the process. This may involve size reduction of biomass or municipal waste (grinding or shredding the feedstock to reduce the particle size), limited cleaning of industrial gases to reduce impurities, or purification of cooking/vegetable oil to remove impurities that can damage catalyst. There are systems level scalability challenges (how to get X number of trucks per day on site delivering municipal waste) and technical challenges (how to selectivity purify the feedstock to optimize cost and performance).

2) Feedstock conversion and product purification. Scaling the feedstock conversion to a hydrocarbon liquid fuel then can involve new processing units, e.g. novel gas fermentation technology to convert industrial waste gas, and modifying existing technology and going much larger in scale, e.g. adapting existing gasification technology to produce synthesis gas for synfuel production.

3) Product distribution, after all, brings its own scalability challenges. For instance, in the US ethanol is typically blended close to the final destination. As a result a robust infrastructure has developed to enable this. 

Sebastian Klemm: What potentials of sustainable fuels have you been able to leverage in specific projects?

Michael Schultz: I have been fortunate to work on a number of projects to scale up and commercialize sustainable fuels.

In my role at LanzaTech we were successful in the scaleup of the production of sustainable ethanol from waste industrial gases, used as a gasoline blending component, and secured the first commercial projects for this technology. We also worked closely with Pacific Northwest National Lab to develop and scale the first technology for production of sustainable aviation fuel from ethanol.

As a consultant I have worked with clients on project development for sustainable aviation fuel, and technology evaluation for production of renewable diesel. 

Sebastian Klemm: The aviation industry has become a fixture of global transport as well as global emissions. While mobility may be perceived as a social good and integral to a global economy paradigm. The pollutants that trail movement by flight – carbon dioxide, nitrogen oxides, water vapor in contrails, black carbon – are not. [9] Beyond fuel efficiency measures through propulsion technologies, aerodynamic aircraft shapes, lightweight materials – to reduce emissions:

What are tangible paths to SAF – Sustainable Aviation Fuels? 

Michael Schultz: Three pathways have emerged as the most developed to date. The first is a route called HEFA (Hydroprocessed Esters and Fatty Acids), also known as HVO (hydrotreated vegetable oil). This is a fancy way of saying that oils and fats from plants and animals go through a hydroprocessing step (similar to a typical oil refinery operation) and downstream conversion to produce sustainable aviation fuel.

Alcohol to Jet (ATJ) is a promising route, in which alcohol produced from waste industrial gas or fermentation of components from corn or sugar cane is converted to sustainable aviation fuel.

A third route uses gasification of municipal solid waste or biomass to produce synthesis gas (a mixture of hydrogen and carbon monoxide), followed by an established process known as Fischer Tropsche to convert the synthesis gas to sustainable aviation fuel.

Other emerging routes, although earlier stage, include high temperature/high pressure conversion of feedstocks such as algae, fats, and oils, and electrochemical conversion of CO2 into carbon monoxide, followed by the Fischer-Tropsch process. [10]

Sebatian Klemm: Sustainable aviation fuels are a critical part to sustainably transform the transportation system to post-fossil fuel mobility. Decarbonization efforts however do not end with sustainable technologies, as even with renewable energy sources more excessive use may lead to unsustainable rebound effects. – As Matthias Schuler of Transsolar put it in regard of his work on the Masdar City project: “We told the builder from the very beginning that Masdar cannot be made into a CO2-neutral city with technology alone. The concept only works if people’s attitudes and habits change. This may mean lowering our demands.” [11]

What connections do you draw between sustainable fuels, transportation, mobility, and the principle of sufficiency?

Michael Schultz: This is a challenge. I think in many ways we are playing a dangerous game. The immediate challenges of global warming and the impact of CO2 are, in my view, widely accepted. I am not terribly concerned with climate change deniers, as I believe these to be a small (although sometimes vocal) minority.

What is more concerning is the attitude We need sustainable solutions, but they can’t cost more, or We can’t give up the lifestyles we have become accustomed to. I don’t think that market forces alone will do the trick. I don’t think we have a chance to meet the aggressive climate targets, if we continue to dump a pollutant, CO2, into the atmosphere without any economic penalty as we can never compete with the status quo.

I think of analogies in the US, where banning lead in gasoline, sulfur in industrial emissions – leading to smog and acid rain – and dumping hydrocarbons into water ways – leading to lakes and rivers catching fire on a regular basis – was only accomplished through government intervention. – Industry came up with good, technical solutions to these problems, but only when pushed to do so.

In some ways we also need to learn to live differently.  In the last couple of years we have learned that we can work remotely, reducing the need to commute to the office on a daily basis, and the need for frequent air travel to meet clients or attend conferences. This will have a positive benefit going forward. 

Links:

·       Register here for “Paths to Sustainable Fuels” synergy event with Dr. Michael Schultz on 31 May.

·       Contact Dr. Michael Schultz with your professional interest in Sustainable Fuels.

References

↑1, ↑11          archplus: “Post-Oil City – The History of the City’s Future”, English Version, p.17, ISBN 978-3-931435-18-9 https://archplus.net/de/POC-EN/                       accompanying the exhibition Post-Oil City

↑2                 FAO: Water–energy–food nexus

↑3                 Statista: Global oil demand 2006-2026

↑4                 RFA: Ethanol Biorefinery Locations Map

↑5                 German Energy Agency (dena): Fuels & technologies

↑6                 Synthetic_fuel – Wikipedia

↑7                 Biofuel – Wikipedia

↑8                 https://www.ptisolns.com/mike-schultz

↑9                 Drawdown, edited by Paul Hawken, Penguin Books 2017, p.150                                           https://www.drawdown.org/the-book

↑10               Fischer–Tropsch process – Wikipedia

Sustainable Technology Separations

Separations are the underappreciated workhorse of the refining, petrochemical and specialty chemicals industries.  This covers everything from crude towers used to separate crude oil into fractions for various refining technologies, filtration and centrifugation used to recover crystallized products in specialty chemicals, and distillation used for product recovery in most products that we use every day.

In 2016, Nature published an article titled ‘Seven chemical separations to change the world’. The seven identified included: 

1)      hydrocarbons from crude oil

2)      uranium from seawater

3)      alkenes from alkanes

4)      greenhouse gases from emissions

5)      rare-earth metals from ores

6)      benzene derivatives

7)      trace contaminants from water

This list covers both improvements to existing separations (1, 3, 6) and new separation needs for a more sustainable future (2, 4, 5, 7). Let’s look at three areas where advances in separation technology will be critical to get to a sustainable, low carbon future:

·       Separations to enable new chemical, biological, or electrochemical technology

·       The separation IS the novel technology

·       Energy efficiency—boring, but effective

Separations to enable novel reactor technology:    Separations are important for advancing sustainable technology because new technologies introduce new separation challenges, such as recovery of intracellular products from microbes, often referred to as Downstream Processing (DSP), separation and purification of bio-oil fractions produced from pyrolysis of waste plastic or biomass, or gas separations from electrolytic reduction of CO2. 

While these separation problems are new, the solutions will likely rely on conventional unit operations like membranes, solvents, solid sorbents, and distillation.

When developing a new technology, it is important to think about the separations from the start.  The figure below that shows that by integrating these steps early in technology development, we can develop a more optimized flow scheme. It is sometimes tempting to focus exclusively during early-stage R&D on maximizing yield or conversion in the reaction. This is a mistake. While it is important to understand the conditions needed to maximize yield or conversion, this is rarely the optimal overall condition. Perhaps high conversion generates more byproducts, reducing yield and increasing downstream separation costs.  Perhaps we need higher pressure or temperatures to achieve that high conversion, which may create additional downstream costs.  We can avoid surprises by integrating the separation system early in technology development and evaluating reaction/separation tradeoffs.

The Separation IS The Technology

Removal of CO2 from air seems crazy, and probably is. Any ‘smart’ engineer will tell you that trying to recover a gaseous component at a 400 ppm concentration from a stagnant gas at ambient pressure is a fool’s errand, but that’s what we are trying to do.  As a newbie at (pre-Honeywell) UOP we were fortunate to have a visit from Nobel Laureate George Olah, when he spoke about his ideas around a methanol economy which included CO2 recovery from the air. A few of us sat around afterward pooh-poohing the silly academic who thought this was a good idea, because there was no way this could be done economically.  Well, here we are nearly 25 years later, and a number of companies are trying to do just that, with billions of $ in investment flowing into this space.  I think we have no choice but to pursue this route, which in addition dramatically reducing the amount of CO2 that flows into the atmosphere in the first place.  A number of creative companies are exploring ways to do this with various solid sorbents or liquid solvents, innovating in ways that didn’t seem possible decades ago. 

Other interesting activities where the separation is the technology involve lithium recovery from brine or seawater for battery technology, and metal organic framework (MOFs) reaching maturity as advanced sorbents for a number of applications.

Energy Efficiency—Boring, but effective

Separations require energy input, usually using heat, pressure, or mechanical energy to drive the separation and often have a yield loss. So one way to improve sustainability of technology is to improve the separation and reduce energy demand of existing separations technology.  This can include:

·       Heat pumps/mechanical vapor recompression to improve the energy efficiency of distillation columns

·       Dividing wall distillation columns (DWCs) to replace multiple columns and reduce energy requirements

·       Membrane systems as pre/post separations to support existing distillation systems

Often, we are trading off additional capital to reduce operating cost, but also save energy and along with it reduce CO2 emissions associated with those energy sources. The growing availability of cheap, renewable electricity can open up new opportunities that may not have made sense in the past. 

Some guidelines when considering separations for sustainable technology:

·       Don’t forget about the separation.  Integration and optimization of the separation system with the reactor systems is important to achieving commercial success.

·       Don’t reinvent the wheel.  Often, we can use existing technology, perhaps with some modification, to accomplish the separation we need.  This is often a quicker and cheaper way to scale up.

·       Don’t forget about energy efficiency.  Typically low hanging fruit--may require some upfront capital with the benefits of lower operating costs and a significant reduction in CO2 emitting fuel sources.

High Value Products—A Necessary Detour on the Road to a Robust Bioeconomy?

The challenges of scaling a new technology in the chemical or biological processing industries have been well documented, and I’ve previously outlined an approach to scale up efficiently to reduce the time, cost, and risk of scaleup, including thoughts on process engineering, modeling, and multi-scale data  Trying to compete in the fuels and petrochemical space adds another significant challenge—the massive scale of conventional technologies.  Often a step beyond that first ‘small’ commercial unit is needed just to be competitive, as outlined in the table below.        

Take cellulosic ethanol as an illustrative example.  Several of the larger projects that have been built have a capacity on the order of 25-50 M gallons per year, or about 75,000 – 150,000 tons/year.  For those used to refining terminology, this is about 1800-3600 BPSD (barrels per stream day), orders of magnitude below world scale refineries.  This is even several times smaller than a world scale ethanol plant, meaning that novel biofuels technologies must compete on 1st plant economics, with an investment of hundreds of millions of dollars, at a scale that is several times smaller than the established technology.  In other words, additional scale-up is needed just to approach competitive economics.  This makes it very difficult to be disruptive! 

These challenges are leading many companies in this space to turn towards higher value products.  Significant advances in biotechnology are creating opportunities to produce everything from chemicals like succinic acid and 14-butanediol, proteins for fish, animals, and humans, and leather, silk and meat replacements. 

While often discussed as a pivot signaling the end of advanced biofuels as we know it, I see this more as a necessary detour on the road to a robust bioeconomy.  A robust bioeconomy will require both commodity fuels and higher value, smaller market products.  This detour takes us to projects with higher value products, and therefore better returns, at a scale that is more relevant for the product in question. At the same time this detour provides an opportunity to work through scale-up challenges, risk reduction, and industry acceptance of larger industrial biotechnology projects at this relevant scale, paving the way for the large biofuels projects and a robust bioeconomy!

Fake it 'Till You Make It? Better Yet, Understand Your Risks

Great read here on #Theranos and the recent fraud charges filed by the SEC.  The 'fake it till you make it' culture is real, not only in Silicon Valley but with inventors across the world.  Early in my career I had the opportunity to co-develop a first of its kind distillation technology.  The lead engineer on the project, and inspiration behind the idea said we had to find all of the curmudgeons in the company who could tell us what we were doing wrong.  After several humbling working sessions that left me licking my wounds we were able to address their concerns and ultimately come up with a more robust product.  Lesson learned--if you don't know what's wrong with your idea, someone else will figure it out.   Startups and inventors owe it to themselves, their employees, their investors, and their partners to understand the risks and better yet explain what you are doing to mitigate those risks.  

Cities Acting to Address Climate Issues

On December 4th, City Digital at the UI Labs space on Goose Island in Chicago organized a forum titled “Call to Action: A Forum on Cities, Technology, & Climate.”  This event was held in conjunction with the North American Climate Summit being held this week in Chicago.  My summary and takeaways.  

Scaling New Technology

The project development cycle for an established process technology is well known, with an initial Conceptual Design phase to define the project, develop a block flow diagram, and generate a cost estimate that is typically +/- 50%. Feasibility, Basic Engineering, Detailed Engineering, Procurement and Construction, and Start-up then follow. 

The conceptual design phase for an established technology can generally be completed in 2-4 months. However, for a new technology we need much more time to get this right! To do this we can bring process engineering into the picture as early as possible, even before discovery R&D. In fact, if we start with the conceptual design, or process concept, we can use this as a framework to drive new technology development, scale-up and commercialization. This process concept is not set in stone, and, in fact, should be reviewed and updated as we progress throughout the scale-up effort. 

See the rest of the article published here.

Classical Chemical Technology Wins Role in Bioprocessing

The global market for bioproducts is robust and growing, as noted by several recent studies, including a 2016 report from Zion Research that estimates a 2015 renewable chemicals market of $50 billion, with a five-year compound annual growth rate of 11% [1], and BP’s annual world energy review that pegs 2015 global biofuels production at 74.2 million metric tons oil equivalent [2]. The Biotechnology Innovation Organization released a 2016 report that summarizes these studies [3].

Read the reaminder of the article published here: