GM Banks on Coskata's Cellulosic Ethanol Breakthrough
by Jeremy Elton Jacquot, Los Angeles on 01.14.08
GM is pinning its biofuel hopes on Coskata, a biofuel start-up bankrolled by the likes of VC heavyweight Vinod Khosla, which has devised a commercially viable process to bring cellulosic ethanol to market by 2011. Coskata's process relies on a 3-step syngas-to-ethanol process (pictured above) and patented microorganisms to produce ethanol from almost any carbon-based feedstock - garbage, plant waste, even old tires - for roughly half the cost of producing gasoline.
It is enzyme independent and wouldn't require the addition of any extra chemicals or other pre-treatments. It consumes less than 1 gallon of water to produce the equivalent of ethanol; this compares very favorably with other processes, which typically consume upwards of 3 gallons. The proprietary process would be used to make ethanol from GM facilities' non-recyclable vehicle parts and waste
Image courtesy of m.gifford via flickr
In initial tests conducted by the Argonne National Laboratory, the ethanol generated 7.7 times the energy used to produce it; corn-based ethanol, by comparison, only generates 1.3 times the energy used to produce it. Compared to gasoline, it also cut carbon dioxide emissions by 84%.
Coskata and GM expect to have a pilot plant up and operating by the fourth quarter of 2008; the ethanol will be used to test vehicles at GM's Milford Proving Grounds. The start-up expects to have a commercial-scale plant with the capacity to manufacture 50-100 m gallons of ethanol per year going by 2011.
Via ::Reuters: GM eyes breakthrough in cellulosic ethanol(news website)
See also: ::Conceptualize this: GM Unveils Yet Another Concept Car, ::GM 2007 Ride and Drive, ::GM Promotes Flexfuel When You Can't Find Ethanol
"Compared to gasoline, it also cut carbon dioxide emissions by 84%."
if this holds true, it is very encouraging
Only 15,385 more plants like that one and we'll be making 1 mb/d. Woohoo!
GM has an enormous amount of E85 capable vehicles, even some that are not badged so.
This makes good sense for them to push, from an economic standpoint.
Most new cars are capable of handling ethanol. The biggerst problem is fuel lines and various rubber components that in some cars were susceptible to melting with ethanol going through them. But in my research i have found this to be futureproofed in most japanese cars manufactured after 94. You also have to keep in mind that 100 litres of ethanold does not hld the same ammount of energy as 100 litres of petrol. You have to burn slightly more to achieve the same ammount of power in your car, so a barrel for barrel comparison doesnt work. Not to mention that not all of the oil in a barrel is petrol.
1). It is far better to plow the wastes back into the fields, helping to avert soil depletion.
2). Gasification is better suited to producing methanol (using a catalyst).
3).The "proprietary bacteria" is genetically enhanced Ecoli.
This is so wrong in so many ways it has to be a money maker.
Of course it's a moneymaker, this is GM we're talking about.
I agree that it would be much better to plow the natural waste back into fields, but I really don't believe that's a step that's going to be made. I think this plan would be ideal in cities, where people can't actually compost their food waste. Instead of their garbage all going to a dump, it could simply be sorted by natural and unnatural waste. Natural waste could be turned into fuel, and unnatural waste recycled. Aside from that, a lot of people's natural waste is genetically modified, which isn't something we want put back into the soil anyways. The biggest concern here is the "proprietary bacteria," which could be devastating if leaked into the environment. Overall, I think it could be a great idea for metropolitan waste management, and produce clean fuel at the same time. Sounds good to me.
this makes sense.. sell your 'waste' to your customers, be it in the form of fuel... brilliant!
'1). It is far better to plow the wastes back into the fields, helping to avert soil depletion'
---No, you are mistaken. Plowing wastes into the ground is what causes soil depletion. Plowing turns up the top surface of soil, breaking up roots and disturbing/killing most of the microbial life located there. Not to mention greatly loosening the soil. All of these things make it difficult for soil to stay in place during rain and wind. Plowing causes soil depletion. Maybe you meant to say that wastes should be left to decompose on the surface of the soil, which does help the soil and helps lessen depletion. In any case, crop wastes do not need to be left to prevent soil depletion. Simply leaving the soil undisturbed and allowing the roots to accumulate will be enough to hold the soil tight. Furthermore, most of the farmers I have seen do not plow their wastes into the ground - they burn the stuff on the fields or bale it to be taken away for other purposes. It makes more sense and is more beneficial to simply take most of the waste to be made into ethanol.
"1). It is far better to plow the wastes back into the fields, helping to avert soil depletion."
The article said it was capable of producing ethanol from almost any carbon based feedstock, garbage, plant waste, even old tires. Now to me it seems it would be easier and cheaper to find garbage here in the states than it would be to grow some crop to use. That is not to say that GM can't make braindead choices, I mean, we have to remember who we are talking about.
"2). Gasification is better suited to producing methanol (using a catalyst)."
Not sure how this would interfere with ethanol production. Plenty of garbage to go around.
"3).The "proprietary bacteria" is genetically enhanced Ecoli."
The only truly scary part of that sentence to me is 'proprietary'. Women are voluntarily injecting a strain of botulism into their faces. If we can (safely) use organisms to our benefit, then that is exactly what we need to do. But transparency and oversight in government and corporate manipulations of these organisms is key. Patenting a living thing is morally retarded, even if it is a virus strain.
GM's own patented ecoli.....nice
look into 'morgellons' the human disease alledgedly now being traced back to agrobacterum from genetically modified plants
it's an itch you cant scratch
see - http://www.newscientist.com/channel/health/mg19526210.700-morgellons-disease-the-itch-that-wont-be-scratched.html
look into 'morgellons' the human disease alledgedly now being traced back to agrobacterum from genetically modified plants
it's an itch you cant scratch
see - http://www.newscientist.com/channel/health/mg19526210.700-morgellons-disease-the-itch-that-wont-be-scratched.html
On the whole of the internet I cannot find a single other source making this claim including the Morgellons Research Foundation and the CDC.
...but it must be true, I read it on the internet...
"...but it must be true, I read it on the internet..."
I think there is no reason to be condescending on this website. It is clear that everyone on this site are very thoughtful people and that problems with reliable sources on the internet is well known.
Why do people feel it necessary to belittle others to get their point across? It really doesn't make me listen any better.
In any case if the CDC doesn't have it on their site you should question whether this is reliable info.
I"ve read or heard somewhere on Dutch television this bacteria can be found inside of elephant poop. Any ideas it this is true?
Came across your blog this evening. Wanted to help the whole discussion around Coskata's organisms.
My name is Wes Bolsen, and I am the CMO & Vice President of Coskata.
Our organisms are anaerobic organisms, meaning that they die in the presence of oxygen. This renders them absolutely harmless to both people and animals.
The microorganisms are NOT Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO). They are simply nurtured in Coskata’s labs, which are some of the foremost anaerobic microbiology labs in the country. The only reason that they are proprietary, is that scientists and researchers have spent most of their life looking for a naturally occurring organism like this that would make ethanol. The US Patent office allows for strains to be filed, so that there can be some protection once it is put “on file”. The University of Oklahoma patented these, and Coskata licensed them for the life of the patent.
We are very excited to have the heart of the Coskata process using a naturally occurring, non-harmful, dies in the presence of oxygen, yet very hard to find organism.
I hope this helps to clear things up.
Wes
Thank you for commenting. I think a lot of us in the environmental community are afraid of the introduction of genetically modified microorganisms into large scale production. We've seen the unintended consequences of things like Bt corn, as well as the introduction of nonnative species on native habitats in general, and a bigger and badder E. coli that could live in water systems would be a potentially huge risk. It's good to know that one can find existing organisms to do the job without entering into the unknown territory of genetic modification. But E. coli is also supposedly anaerobic, and it too can survive in water systems. Who's to say that yours can't as well if it's reproduced on a mass scale? What would be the consequences if it did? Would they be negligable or serious?
Of course, if we were deeply worried about every microorganism in commercial production getting out into the environment, we would ban the production of cheese, wine, beer, yogurt....
This sounds exciting!
I think burning coal to generate ethanol should be ok if the pollution is less compared to Oil.
Also it can keep the oil prices in check.
Can Coskata process use raw crushed Oil Shale ? If somehow this is made possible , US Could be 100% independent of Oil.
Everyone knows that US has World largest reserves of Oil shale, even greater than the Oil reserves in the middle east.
The by-products generated in making ethanol can either be further processed to obtain more ethanol or sold as animal feed.