2005 OBP Biennial Peer Review

1. 2005 OBP Biennial Peer Review Biomass Storage for the Refining Industry Corey W. Radtke Biomass Feedstock Interface Platform November 14, 2005

2. Overview Work Objective • Objective – Decrease 2005 cost to $35/dry ton by 2015 for the purpose reducing sugar cost by almost 2 cents per lb, for all Billion Ton Vision Feedstocks • Budget – About $2M per year from 2004 -2006 • Current Partners – National Laboratories, Universities, Equipment Industry • Developing Partners – Agribusiness Commodity Companies, Regional Feedstock Centers Partnerships, Feedstock Interface to Biorefining Partners Note: Sugar conversion cost estimate reductions based on the 2005 post-enzyme subcontract conversion case.

3. Pathway • Pathway Impact: • B-Level Milestone – Agriculture residue and energy crop feedstocks available to a biorefinery at $35/dry ton by 2015 • C-Level Milestones – Production($10.00), Harvest/Collect($12.50), Storage($1.75), Transport($8.00), Preprocessing ($2.75), System Integration • Cost and Quality Improvements (dry biomass first, wet second) Agriculture Residue Pathway Energy Crops Pathway

4. Approach 1. DOE Multi-Year Technical Plan Barriers for Feedstock Supply can be grouped into: • Cost - $35 / try ton (Operational and Capital Costs) • Quality – dockage, composition, conversion efficiency (selective harvest, fractional milling, in-storage fractional conversion) • Quantity – biomass types (Billion Ton Study) 2. Develop preprocessing based feedstock supply systems that interface biorefining conversion processes to feedstock resources: • Corn Stover • Cereal Straw • Switchgrass

5. Interim Stage Gate Overview

6. Summarized Reviewer Comments • Complete INL-Storage portion of Stategate Reviewer’s Comments from FY05 review: • Stage Placement • Data Collection • Well Leveraged across several projects to get useful baseline data • Very important as we all agree that storage is inevitable • Appears that there is a method for statically relevant data, important to make sure that happens • Need to consider how the results can be applied to other systems • How can learnings be applied to multiple types of storage for the same site, e.g., different periods of time • Comment for all three storage projects [other storage projects at review] • Need to keep in mind the clear vision for how the material will get to the pile • There are three ensiling projects ISU/BMAP/Imperial that are all doing similar activities - INL should coordinate these project.

7. DOE Response • Storage Research, FY05 • Please comment on the DOE response to the reviewers comments • Projected was extended beyond a baseline data collection action, and into an assessment of feedstock quality through wet and dry systems. • Investigation was performed in manner to ensure findings extend to other feedstocks and storage methods. • Harvest and assembly are included as part of an overall Feedstock Assembly write-up, putting the Storage section findings in overall context of biomass cost and quality as delivered to a Biorefinery. • Coordinating with Imperial project as appropriate to AOP.

8. DOE Response • Storage Research, FY05; Key Findings of Dry Storage Systems • Bales and chopped pile stored outdoors for 1-year • revealed 0.85% and 3.67% dry matter losses, respectively • Loaves showed 14% dry matter loss, due to mechanical • loss and research nature (lack of practice) using of this • form of storage

9. DOE Response • Storage Research, FY05; Key Findings of Dry Storage Systems • Visually damaged areas after 1-year of dry storage was less than 25% • in all storage systems. • Total sugar degradation (quality loss) was relatively insignificant.

10. DOE Response • Storage Research, FY05; Key Findings of Wet Storage Systems • A host-pile approach was taken to Integrate all phases of Feedstock Assembly through wet storage

11. DOE Response • Storage Research, FY05; Key Findings of Wet Storage Systems • Wet stored corn stover was tested for effects of treatment additives on Biorefinery-specific parameters • About 5% glucan was lost from stover stored in every treatment. • Some evidence for in-storage pretreatment of corn stover was found (this was baseline, not an optimization activity)

12. DOE Response • Storage Research, FY05; Key Findings of Wet Storage Systems • Ethanol production from readily available sugars in storage, or “Fractional Conversion” • was identified as an impact item for future research • Necessary to marry with appropriate pretreatment infrastructure for recovery • Ungulate mimetic – overall, the process intensity for ethanol conversion may be proportional to the • recalcitrance of the feedstock

13. Summary and Future Work