Technology Review - Published By MIT
Advertisement

A New Biofuel: Propane

Propane chemically derived from corn could be used in heating and transportation.

By Katherine Bourzac

Thursday, April 19, 2007

smaller text tool iconmedium text tool iconlarger text tool icon

MIT researchers say they have developed an efficient chemical process for making propane from corn or sugarcane. They are incorporating a startup this week to commercialize the biopropane process, which they hope will find a place in the existing $21 billion U.S. market for the fuel.

Biofuel alternative: MIT researchers are developing an efficient process for making propane from corn or sugarcane.
Credit: Dawn M. Turner

While much of the attention on biofuels has focused on ethanol, the process developed by the MIT researchers produces propane, says Andrew Peterson, one of the graduate students who demonstrated the reactions. Propane is used in the United States for residential heating and some industrial processes, and to a limited extent as a liquid transportation fuel. "We're making a demonstrated fuel" for which a market and an infrastructure already exist, says Peterson, who works in the lab of chemical-engineering professor Jefferson Tester and has founded the startup C3 BioEnergy, based in Cambridge, MA, to commercialize the technology.

Propane, which is currently made from petroleum, has a higher energy density than ethanol, and although it is often used in its gaseous form, it's the cleanest-burning liquid fuel.

The C3 BioEnergy process depends on supercritical water--water at a very high temperature and pressure--which facilitates the reactions that turn a biological compound into propane. Peterson wouldn't reveal the starting compound, but he says that it is a product of the fermentation of the sugars found in corn or sugarcane. The reaction is driven by heat, requiring no catalysts. At supercritical temperature and pressure, Peterson says, "water does bizarre things. It becomes like a nonpolar solvent" and mixes with the organic compounds. Once the reaction has taken place, the solution is kept under high pressure and cooled to room temperature so that the propane comes out of the solution and floats to the top. "We've demonstrated that we can make propane," says Peterson. "Now we're trying to optimize the reaction rate and get it to a scalable stage."

Peterson says the biopropane conversion has a good energy balance: not much fossil fuel needs to be burned during production. The reaction does not require the input of a large amount of energy because the heat that's key to the biopropane conversion is recoverable using a heat exchanger, a device that transfers heat in and out of a fluid.

"All biofuel reactions involve removing oxygen from the starting compound," says George Huber, assistant professor of chemical engineering at the University of Massachusetts, in Amherst. There are a number of strategies for doing this, including reactions that rely on biological catalysts. But, says Huber, "supercritical fluids are a very promising way to make biofuels. You can do it in a very small reactor in a very short time, so you can do it very economically."

Other academic labs are developing processes that use high-temperature, high-pressure fluids to make biofuels. Douglas Elliott, at the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, in Richland, WA, is using near-supercritical conditions in combination with a catalyst to treat wastewater and unprocessed biomass. Under these conditions, organic compounds can be made into a mixture of methane (the main component in natural gas) and carbon dioxide. "We've gone all the way from small-batch reactors to treating a few gallons of wastewater per hour," says Elliott, who is working with a company on commercializing the technology for water treatment. "We're still in the lab with biomass."

Story continues below


Huber and Elliott say the MIT biopropane process is novel. "I've never seen anyone make propane with supercritical fluids," says Huber.

In some countries, including Australia, propane is more widely used as a transportation fuel. In the United States, "you would have to modify engines to use it," says Huber. "Biopropane could be used where we already use propane."

Comments

  • EROEI - Energy Returned On Energy Invested
    What's the EROEI, including all inputs and outputs?

    Corn to Ethanol, as currently practiced, is finally beginning to be seen as the feel good, foolish, government subsidy, white elephant it is.

    Great for corn farmers and ADM and farm Senators.
    But,
    Price of corn (and downstream food items) rising.
    Price of gasoline with Ethanol also rising.
    Mileage of gasahol being recognized as lower.
    Pollution concerns about gasahol rising.

    EROEI of corn Ethanol is somewhere between .8 and 1.2 (20% negative to 20% positive)

    EROEI of corn to Propane?
    At least >2 or 3?
    Rate this comment: 12345

    nekote
    04/19/2007
    Posts:139
    Avg Rating:
    3/5
    • Re: EROEI - Energy Returned On Energy Invested
      Good question. The researchers say they estimate it would be 1.45 to 1.7, so not 2 or 3. (That number is the amount of energy in a gallon of the fuel divided by the energy in the fossil fuel that went into making that gallon.) Doug Elliott at PNRL said one of the barriers to using these kinds of techniques with crude biomass is the mineral content.
      Rate this comment: 12345

      Katherine Bo...
      04/19/2007
      Posts:23
      Avg Rating:
      4/5
      • Re: EROEI - Energy Returned On Energy Invested
        While we keep seeing the cost of energy input vs output for biological sourced alcohols, I have yet to see the same for petroleum based fuels.

        What is the EROEI of regular gasoline?

        I would also be interested in a non-partisan version of this number for ethanol.
        Rate this comment: 12345

        edc
        04/19/2007
        Posts:1
        • gasoline current EROEI down to 10 and declining
          Googling for "EROEI gasoline":
          http://www.energybulletin.net/14745.html
          (can't vouch for their "independence" / bias)

          Initially, ~ 100:1
          1970's ~25:1
          current ~ 10:1

          FWIW, other EROEI:
          Biodiesel- 3:1
          Coal- 1:1 to 10:1
          Ethanol- 1.2:1
          Natural Gas- 1:1 to 10:1
          Hydropower- 10:1
          Hydrogen- 0.5:1
          Nuclear- 4:1
          Oil- 1:1 to 100:1
          Oil Sands- 2:1
          Solar PV (2) - 1:1 to 10:1
          Wind (2) - 3:1 to 20:1
          Rate this comment: 12345

          nekote
          04/20/2007
          Posts:139
          Avg Rating:
          3/5
      • Re: EROEI - Energy Returned On Energy Invested
        Isn't the EROI of biodiesel around 3?  If so, that makes it a better bet.  The EROI of algae biodiesel should be higher still, given the 30x yield per acre over other oil crops (however I've never seen an actual EROI estimate for it).
        Rate this comment: 12345

        killian
        11/26/2007
        Posts:70
        Avg Rating:
        4/5
    • Re: EROEI - Energy Returned On Energy Invested
      What is it with the united states of america and corn? There is not enough land on the planet to harvest corn that would suffice energetic needs.
      Rate this comment: 12345

      chanokin
      04/23/2007
      Posts:2
      Avg Rating:
      4/5
  • Another CORN Bio
    Isnt it bad enough that nobody bothered to look at the end result for ethanol that someone has to add more??When will science/politicians realize that corn is not the answer?? Using a MAJOR food stock for anything but FOOD has so many OTHER ramifications!!Because of ETHANOL corn,all meats,milk,eggs,gas,heat,bread,cereal,and flour have all increased in cost!!The poor being hardest hit.Earth that was once RESTED will now be used because farmers cant afford to let fields lie fallow and rest.resulting in more water pollution,soil erosion and poorer quality earth.
    Just what we need more uses for corn the RICH get richer!! Congratulations
    Rate this comment: 12345

    McMillan968
    04/19/2007
    Posts:38
    Avg Rating:
    2/5
    • Re: Another CORN Bio
      The government has subsidized the production of corn for years, and dumped the surplus on the world markets.  Americans complain when other countries dump products or commodities on us, but how many farmers worldwide have we put out of business because they can't compete with our underpriced corn? Now that corn is profitable to grow, the American farmers and farmers worldwide have responded by planting the largest crop since WWII.  I believe there will be plenty of corn for both food and fuel.
          The problem with ethanol is that it makes a great additive to gasoline, but is not the optimal fuel for today's low compression, low octane engines.  The widespread use of high concentrations of ethanol would optimally require a high compression, high octane engine which would then be unsuitable for the use of regular low octane gasoline when ethanol is not available.  Using corn to make propane instead produces a fuel that already has a market and an infrastructure for sale and distribution.
          Sounds like a good idea to me.

      chuck@biofuelnetwork.net
      http://www.biofuelnetwork.net
      Rate this comment: 12345

      Mr. Biofuel
      04/20/2007
      Posts:1
  • methanol feedstock
    I wonder if something useful can made with a methanol feedstock.  Methonal being produced woods insteed of sugar crops has advantages in bioproduction but it is highly poisonous. I wonder if it can be converted by a cheap/effiecient process to something less toxic and a usefull fuel.
    Rate this comment: 12345

    ryuuguu
    04/20/2007
    Posts:15
    Avg Rating:
    3/5
    • Re: methanol feedstock
      Y'mean, like, biodiesel? :-)

      I'm against making fuel from food. But biodiesel from waste vegetable oil could displace a tiny portion, perhaps 3%, of the total North American diesel fuel stream. Every bit counts, no?

      My fear is that biodiesel will become a monster like ethanol has become, driving the price of soy way up. (Soy is a stupid feedstock for biodiesel, anyway, but them farmers only know how to grow beans and corn. :-)
      Rate this comment: 12345

      Bytesmiths
      04/25/2007
      Posts:4
      Avg Rating:
      5/5
  • Cellulosic
    The exec summary on the C3 Bioenergy website states that they can very possibly leverage the enzymes being developed for cellulosic ethanol processes.  Given that this process is still in the lab, it could very likely have no exposure to corn.  But right now, today, corn is the best way to make ethanol - albeit not a great solution.
    Rate this comment: 12345

    secondmidnit...
    04/20/2007
    Posts:2
  • Wasteful
    The whole fuel from corn scam is wierd I don't get how so many people by into something that is so tax payer driven,without subsidies this industry would die all it has managed to do is drive up the cost of feed,it is a boondoggle at best,the energy required to plant,grown,harvest,covert to fuel and then transport to market is greater then the energy it produces as fuel it could only exist in the USA with it's powerful farming lobbies!
    Rate this comment: 12345

    wizardB
    04/23/2007
    Posts:18
    Avg Rating:
    3/5
    • Re: Wasteful
      For your information The Ethanol Producers do not receive any subsides.

      The subsides are received by the Oil Companies for blending their gas with Ethanol.
      Rate this comment: 12345

      Boilerman
      06/29/2007
      Posts:3
      Avg Rating:
      4/5
  • ethanol stats vs crude oil
    Ethanol is not an effective substitute for oil.  Present world oil consumption is about 25 Billion Barrels a year or 68 Million Barrels a day.  The US alone consumes about 1/3 of that total or about 20 Million Barrels a day or 8 Billion Barrels a year.  The US produces 7.61 Million Barrels a day or 2.8 Billion Barrels a year.  That leaves a shortfall of  5.2 Billion Barrels of oil to import annually at a cost of $60/bbl is an energy tab of $312,000,000,000.00 going overseas every year. 

    Presently the US ethanol industry kicks out 0.31 Million Barrels a day or 0.114 Billion Barrels a year (note that the ethanol industry likes to quote their production numbers in gallons.  There are 42 gallons in one barrel).  In relationship to total US production ethanol represents 3.9% share of the US production, 1.4% of US daily consumption, or 0.004% of world daily consumption.  Presently there is more ethanol infrastructure in place that there is corn available to purchase.  As a consequence, corn prices have risen, and all the products that are derived from corn, including corn tortillas down in Mexico (up 40% in the last 2 years).

    Ethanol does not have the same BTU that gasoline does. 
    Ethanol has 76,000 BTU/gallon.  Gasoline has 125,000 BTU/gallon
    Ethanol is 61% as effective as gasoline, so if you got 20 MPG on gas, you’d get 12.2 MPG on pure ethanol.
    So the net effect of producing the annual US 114 Million Barrels Ethanol yields an equivalent 69 Million Barrels of Oil (gasoline) after BTU correction.

    The total energy needed to produce ethanol from corn grain — including fermentation, fertilizing, fuel for farm tractors, harvesting and transporting the grain, building and operating an ethanol plant, and the natural gas used to distill corn sugars into alcohol — is about the same (within a factor of two plus or minus) as the energy content of the ethanol produced. Studies have concluded, though no peer-reviewed academic studies, that ethanol production yields more energy than it consumes, in a ratio of about 1.34:1, or that corn ethanol yields 26% more energy than is used to make it and that 74% of each gallon of ethanol produced is required to replace the energy used in production.  In other words to produce the 114 Million Barrels of Ethanol every year, we use 84 Million Barrels to make it.  So the net “new” energy produced is 30 Million Barrels Ethanol annually.  After equating this for BTU content, it yields 18.3 Million Barrels of oil equivalent.  At 18.3 Million Barrels a year, the US oil industry presently produces that equivalent amount in 2.4 days, the world oil industry produces that equivalent in 6.46 hours. 

    To put this new resource in a cost perspective, the US taxpayer subsidied the corn-ethanol cycle to the tune of $3,300,000,000.00 in 2004.  Therefore the net cost of adding the 18,300,000 Bbls of “new” ethanol fuel comes at a net cost of $180.32 Barrel to the American public, or $4.29/gallon.   This is one of the dumbest “feel good – green” deals I have seen.

    The above facts do not even factor in the irreversible mining of the soil humus, the trade-offs in higher food prices.

    At any rate, ethanol is here to stay.  I think that other grains might also be sucked into the mix.  I’d hate to see a lot of the set-aside CRP lands put back into production, fence row to fence row to just make more ethanol to put in our cars.  It would make a lot more sense to make more fuel efficient cars, that to plow up all of our lands.
    Rate this comment: 12345

    hawkeyestrat...
    04/23/2007
    Posts:1
    Avg Rating:
    5/5
    • Re: ethanol stats vs crude oil
      If ethanol was an economic way to produce fuel, all the corn farmers should be using it to run their tractors. The same should hold true for biodiesel. I don't think this is happening anywhere.
      ER
      Rate this comment: 12345

      riffcon
      04/25/2007
      Posts:10
      Avg Rating:
      4/5
      • Re: ethanol stats vs crude oil
        That is an unfortunate side effect of this industry, not a single tractor used to produce the corn has been converted to a more energy efficient or "green" fuel source, such as their own corn ethanol. I come from a farming community in Indiana.  I was back home as an ethanol production plant was planning to be made in my hometown area.  Actuall, about 5 were planning to be built, though, only one actually did any planning, the others just suddenly decided they were going to also build nearby and kept stressing how they had had these plans in the works for years.

        Farmers, unfortunately, seem to be a stubborn bunch - I am one, who resist change.  this is actually a definition of most of the US.  Most farmers I spoke with last year, June 2006, had never heard of ethanol.  They didn't know anything about it and that they could help produce it.  But since the ethanol manufacturers kept stressing how much more they could sell their product at, for a higher profit, they flocked to the idea.

        CHeck back in your history about the total domestic production of corn in this company over the last 100 years.  You'll see a huge expansion from other crops to corn in the 40's (WWII), so much so, the government started paying farmers NOT to grow corn!  We flooded the market and then, with such a surplus that couldn't all be shipped out, we had to invent new ways to use it.  Compare this overstock of corn in the US versus the price/production rate of Coke and Pepsi and other HFCS users and you'll see some wonderful trends.

        Back to the farmers last year, no one ever talked about how selling their corn for a higher profit would effect the price of almost every foodstuff available on the market.  A minor side efect no one thought of or simply forgot to mention.
        Rate this comment: 12345

        Chad
        05/25/2007
        Posts:6
        Avg Rating:
        3/5
      • Re: ethanol stats vs crude oil
        We use biodiesel in our farm machinery. We currently make this from waste oil, gleaned from local restaurants. That supplies about ten times what we need, and we distribute the surplus to the local community for voluntary donations.

        We would like to begin experiments with growing our own oilseed (probably rapeseed, inter-cropped with a nitrogen fixer), but not this growing season -- maybe next year.
        Rate this comment: 12345

        Bytesmiths
        02/25/2009
        Posts:4
        Avg Rating:
        5/5
  • EROEI ethanol from sugar cane
    There is information missing in your discussion. EROEI from sugar cane is up to 8.1, even in some cases it can reach 11 or 12.
    Rate this comment: 12345

    rodrigoesbor...
    04/01/2008
    Posts:1
    Avg Rating:
    4/5

Log In

Forgot your password?     Register »
Advertisement

Videos

Malleable Maps, Artistic Robots and Bubble Interfaces
Technology Review January/February 2010

Current Issue

Security in the Ether
Information technology's next grand challenge will be to secure the cloud--and prove we can trust it.
Advertisement
Advertisement
Subscribe to Technology Review's daily e-mail update. Enter your e-mail address

TECHNOLOGY RESOURCES

More Technology News from Forbes

Advertisement
MIT Massachusetts Institute of Technology © 2010 Technology Review. All Rights Reserved.