14 July '09
1:29 PM EDT
No Comments
  Biofuel
  Funding

Exxon Bets Algae is the Best Biofuel Feedstock

Exxon Mobil, the world’s largest oil and gas company, is dipping its toe in the clean tech sector with a  $600 million investment to develop algae-based biofuel as part of its newly formed partnership with Synthetic Genomics, a research and development company launched by J. Craig Venter, the scientist known for decoding the human genome in the 1990s.

Unlike many of its competitors, over the past years Exxon has largely stayed away from the green sector, as its advocated that over the long run fossil fuels are the only viable energy source that will be able to meet rising  global energy demand. But back in the 1970’s and 80’s Exxon was  involved in Solar research. Here’s a list of their solar patents that tells part of the oil major’s clean tech story.

The company’s venture with Synthetic Genomics comes despite its very public doubts that biofuels  even work. Exxon CEO Rex Tillerson called ethanol “moonshine.” With this investment the Texas company is putting its skepticism aside. As part of this venture it plans to invest an initial $300 million with Synthetic for research and development; and, if certain milestones are met, another $300 million.

“We literally looked at every option we could think of, with several key parameters in mind,” Emil Jacobs, vice president for research and development at Exxon’s research and engineering unit, told The New York Times. “Scale was the first. For transportation fuels, if you can’t see whether you can scale a technology up, then you have to question whether you need to be involved at all.”

Scale is probably the major challenge faced by developers of algae-based biofuels. While a number of startups have successfully produced strains of energy-rich algae in the confines of labs, so far, none have been able to scale production to commercial levels. Back in June, GreenFuel Technologies, an extremely well-funded developer in Cambridge, Mass., shut down because it was unable to control and manage its algae production process.

Exxon predicts algae could produce more than 2,000 gallons of fuel per acre of production each year, compared with 650 gallons for palm trees and 450 gallons for sugar cane. Corn yields just 250 gallons per acre a year.

Exxon’s biofuel investment remains quite modest compared to what it invests every year in its oil and gas business. In 2009 the company plans to invest $29 billion in its oil and gas business  and grow production by about 725,000 barrels of oil equivalent per day.

The investment also comes as a number of its competitors are re-focusing back on their core oil and gas business. For example, BP, which over the past year has closed solar panel factories in Europe and the U.S., significantly cut its clean energy investments from $1.5 billion to $1.0 billion.

About BP’s refocus on its core oil and gas business, the Financial Times writes:

[BP CEO] Tony Hayward, who succeeded Lord Browne two years ago, is pinning BP’s hopes for the future more firmly than before on oil and gas. As one former BP executive puts it, ‘oil and gas are in the company’s DNA”. Another says that, while the rest of the world is trying to move forward, Mr Hayward is “turning the clock back.’

Alternative energy provides less than 1 per cent of BP’s revenues and none of its profits. Capital spending will be about $20bn this year, of which at most 5 per cent will go into renewable energy. But the reason behind the faltering of its ambitions for the business are telling – both for the future of the oil industry and for the world’s energy supplies.

Exxon’s investments mark a milestone in the budding algae-based biofuel market, which so far has largely been backed by venture capital firms.  The move could encourage other large strategic investors to enter the sector, which could help speed up overall biofuel production.

25 June '09
7:43 AM EDT
1 Comment
  Biofuel
  Funding

Algae and the scale dilemma or how to transform a ‘curiosity’ into an industry

picture-11 The biofuel sector finds itself in a bind, pummeled by the economic crisis and a shortage of funding.   Also of concern, is ethanol’s poor environmental record.  Nonetheless, algae continues to be seen as a promising feedstock that could revive the once promising biofuel industry. On paper, algae is attractive: it does not require large tracts of land to grow, and it is not a food crop, unlike corn or other sugar-based feedstocks that can tighten regional food supplies. Plus, it’s a carbon sink, because it requires large amounts of CO2 to grow.

Los Angeles-based OriginOil is one of a growing number of research and development companies that have been working to develop a scalable and commercially viable algae production model.

GER recently caught up with OriginOil CEO Riggs Eckelberry, who provided an overview of the opportunities and challenges faced by this budding sector as it seeks to scale from a curiosity into a viable industry. Read More »

17 May '09
12:00 PM EDT
No Comments
  Biofuel
  Cleantech
  Funding
  Solar

This week in green energy: the Washington compromise

Ever since the House Energy and Commerce Committee rolled out its climate change draft bill in March, its authors, Chairman Henry Waxman (D – Calif.), and Rep. Ed Markey (D – Mass.), intentionally left out the amount of CO2 the government would allow energy-dependent companies and electrical utilities to emit as part of the implementation of a cap-and-trade system.  The move was intentional, designed to give both sides more time to negotiate.

On Friday, word came out that both sides had come to some sort of agreement on CO2 permits and, as was expected, energy-intensive industries and the electricity sector did well with the government, agreeing to handout half of all CO2 emission permits to energy-dependent industries and electric utilities.  The permit is an integral part of the cap-and-trade provision of the climate change bill. According to government predictions, once enacted into law, cap-and-trade alone could raise $640 billion.

Environmentalists were lobbying to tighten the supply of permits to force polluters to buy more permits and, as such, raise more funds for cleantech investments.

From the start, House and Senate lawmakers, Democrats, and Republicans, expressed concerns over Waxman – Markey and the bill’s ambitious carbon cutting goals. Of concern was the impact steep CO2 cuts would have on the bottom lines of local industries in coal-dependent states like Pennsylvania, Indiana, or Virginia.  That’s why, on top of the generous permit allocations, eager to pass the bill, backers  also agreed to cut CO2 emissions by 15% by 2020 from an initial 20% over the same time frame.

No one really expected Waxman-Markey to come out unscathed. Right from the start it was deliberately ambitious, with its authors more than aware that in the great Washington game of “give and take” its targets would likely be scaled back. The toned down version and a likely 60-vote majority on the Senate are strong indications that this country will have a climate change law before year-end.

Also, expected to start rolling out of the coffers of the Treasury Department over the next months are some of the stimulus monies set to finance clean energy projects. On its part, the Department of Energy expects to have allocated about 70% of its own funds by Labor Day.  Treasury is expected to disburse government funding via Investment Tax Credits and Production Tax Credits — both of which have been extended by Congress until 2012– and direct cash grants. Like ITCs, cash grants are new funding provisions that will see the government directly provide cash financing to cleantech companies. “Expect an announcement [on cash grants] in June,” an industry source tells GER.

With financing from venture and private equity funds and banks flat lining, the government is fast becoming the “go to source of financing.” Lack of funding forced GreenFuel Technologies, one of the pioneer companies in the “hot” and promising algae-based biofuel business, to shutdown as it was unable to tap new funding to finance its growth.

This dull market is likely to last until 2010 when investments should start flowing again, according to some analysts. Until then the sector will depend on cash-rich companies with large balance sheets for investments. Case in point is this week’s announcement from San Francisco’s Pacific Gas and Electric that it had expanded its agreement with Google-backed BrightSource Energy to buy 1,310 megawatts from seven utility-scale solar power plants. Back in April 2008, PG&E had signed a first agreement with BrightSource for 500 megawatts, with an option to buy another 400 megawatts.

13 May '09
5:55 PM EDT
No Comments
  Biofuel

Algae companie GreenFuel Technologies shuts down

GreenFuel Technologies, one of the pioneer companies in the algae-based biofuel business, is closing down because it was unable to secure new funding to finance its growth.

The company, which had raised about $70 million since its inception in 2001, had recently landed a contract to sell algae-growing greenhouses to a cement maker in Spain. However, it was unable to raise funds to finance constructions of these greenhouses. In January the company laid off about half of its workers.

“We are closing doors. We are a victim of the economy,” Duncan McIntyre at Polaris Venture Partners, told Greentech Media, which first reported on the closing. Polaris was one of GreenFuel Technologies financial backers.

GreenFuel developed a specialty strain of algae that consumed large amounts of carbon dioxide. The algae were later harvested by GreenFuel to be turned into oil for biodiesel.

On paper the process was attractive and helped foster investor and media interest, but the company failed to transition from the lab into a full fledged commercial operation. One issue it encountered was the high cost of production involved in making these energy-rich algae.

While the biofuel sector as a whole is in a bind, algae and its rich oil content and ability to grow on marginal land continues to be seen as a promising biofuel feedstock over the long term.