Progress on Developing Value- Added Uses for Distillers Grains: Current and Evolving Opportunities...
-
Upload
maude-long -
Category
Documents
-
view
213 -
download
0
Transcript of Progress on Developing Value- Added Uses for Distillers Grains: Current and Evolving Opportunities...
Progress on Developing Value-Added Uses for Distillers Grains: Current and Evolving Opportunities
Kurt A. Rosentrater, Ph.D.Department of Agricultural and Biosystems Engineering
Iowa State University
(515) 294-4019
OVERVIEW
1. Ethyl alcohol
2. Coproducts
3. Ongoing research
4. New opportunities
5. Concluding thoughts
2
ETHYL ALCOHOL
3
Ethyl Alcohol – The Fuel of the Future
Ethanol was extensively used as a motor fuel additive prior to the end of World War II (ca. 1933)
1860 Nicholas Otto (b. 1832, d. 1891), a German inventor, used ethanol to fuel an internal combustion engine
1896 Henry Ford’s (b. 1863, d. 1947) first automobile, the quadricycle, used corn-based ethanol as fuel
1908 Hart-Parr Company (Charles City, IA) manufactured tractors that could use ethanol as a fuel
Henry Ford’s (b. 1863, d. 1947) Model T used corn-based ethanol, gasoline, or a combinations as fuel
1918 World War I caused increased need for fuel, including ethanol; demand for ethanol reached nearly 60 million gal/year
1940 The U.S. Army constructed and operated a fuel ethanol plant in Omaha, NE
4
Ethyl Alcohol – The Fuel of the Future
The first distillation column for the production of fuel ethanol was invented by Dennis and Dave Vander Griend at South Dakota State University in 1978/1979
5
DDGS Historically• Many people have asked what the fuel ethanol industry
is going to do about the growing piles of non-fermented leftovers
– “Grain distillers have developed equipment and an attractive market for their recovered grains” (Boruff, 1947)
– “Distillers are recovering, drying, and marketing their destarched grain stillage as distillers dried grains and dried solubles” (Boruff, 1952)
• This question has been around for quite some time, and it also appears that a viable solution had already been developed as far back as the 1940s
6
DDGS Historically
• In the 1940s / 1950s
– 17 lb (7.7 kg) of distillers feed was produced for every 1 bu (56 lb; 25.4 kg) of grain that was processed into ethanol
• Similar to today
– But over 700 gal (2650 L) of water was required to produce this feed (Boruff, 1947; Boruff, 1952; Boruff et al., 1943)
• vs. < 4 gal. of water today
7
GRAIN ALCOHOL DISTILLERY (ca. 1947)
8
MODERN DRYGRIND PROCESS
9
U.S. ETHANOL GROWTH
0
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
12000
14000
1600019
80
1982
1984
1986
1988
1990
1992
1994
1996
1998
2000
2002
2004
2006
2008
2010
2012
2014
2016
2018
2020
Year
Fuel
Eth
anol
(gal
) x 1
0 6
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
Cop
rodu
cts
(t) x
10
6
Ethanol ProductionRFS Mandated ProductionCoproduct Generation
Growth of U.S. fuel ethanol industry
Feb. 2011: 204 plants, 13,771 Mg/y RFS: 15,000 Mg/y of biofuel by 2015
10
0
2E+16
4E+16
6E+16
8E+16
1E+17
1.2E+17
1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010
Year
To
tal U
.S. E
ner
gy
(Btu
)
Consumption - Fossil
Production - Fossil
Nuclear
Renewable
Total Consumption
US EIA, 2011
U.S. ETHANOL GROWTH
11
Renewable8%
Nuclear9%
Crude Oil37%
Natural Gas25%
Coal21%
Hydroelectric, 35%
Wood, 24%
Biofuels, 20%
Wind, 9%
Waste, 6%Geothermal, 5%
Solar, 1%
US EIA, 2011
U.S. ETHANOL GROWTH
Since 1950s, generally 5 to 9 % of total U.S. energy supply has been renewable 12
COPRODUCTS
13
ETHANOL COPRODUCTS
Distillers Wet Grains
Condensed Distillers SolublesDistillers Dried Grains with Solubles
14
COPRODUCT PRICES
15
COPRODUCT PRICES
16
COPRODUCT PRICES
17
COPRODUCT VALUES
18
COPRODUCT VALUES
19
COPRODUCT RESEARCH
• As ethanol industry grows, supply of coproducts will grow
• Balance = key to sustainability
Livestock producers
Ethanol manufacturers
20
ONGOING RESEARCH
21
ONGOING RESEARCH
• Fuel– vs.
• Food– vs.
• Feed– vs.
• Plastics– vs.
• Chemicals– vs.
• Other uses
Goals:• Augment current uses• Develop new market opportunities• Develop/optimize processes and products• Improve sustainability
Context:• Application of physics and chemistry to
biological systems• Manufacturing with biological polymers:
proteins, fibers, lipids
22
ONGOING RESEARCH• Material handling• Pelleting/densification• Aquaculture• Human foods• Plastic composites
23
MATERIAL HANDLING
24
Sieve Opening Size (mm)
2.38 1.68 1.19 0.841
Scale bar = 3.91 mm Scale bar = 2.50 mm
Scale bar = 2.34 mm Scale bar = 0.987 mm
0.595 0.420 0.297 0.210
Scale bar = 0.689 mm Scale bar = 0.52 mm Scale bar = 0.36 mm Scale bar = 0.26 mm
1 2
MATERIAL HANDLING
25
Carbohydrate Protein
2.28
1.68
1.19
Part
icle
Dia
met
er (m
m)
0.84
1
1
Batch 1 Batch 2
1
2
3
4
Pla
nt
5
1
MATERIAL HANDLING
26
AoR (o)
8080
9090
100100
110110
120120
130130
140140
150150
Mas
s F
low
Rat
e (g
/min
)
Mas
s F
low
Rat
e (g
/min
)
z= a + bx + cy
x= AoR (°)y = HR (-)z= MFR (g/min)
R2 = 0.99Error= 2.42
MFR < 100 = Poor Flow100 < MFR < 120 = Fair FlowMFR > 120 = Good Flow
Good flow Fair flow Poor flow
MATERIAL HANDLING
27
z= a + b/x + cy
x= AoR (°)y = HR (-)z= Moisture content (%, db)
R2 = 0.71Error= 4.50
Moisture < 9.9 (Good Flow)9.9 < Moisture < 17.5 (Fair Flow)17.5 > Moisture (Poor Flow)
Good flow Fair flow Poor flow
AoR (o)
00
55
1010
1515
2020
2525
3030
3535
4040
Moi
stur
e C
onte
nt (%
db)
Moi
stur
e C
onte
nt (%
db)
MATERIAL HANDLING
28
y = 2E-11e21.531x
R2 = 0.8368
y = 3.4629x - 3.4854
R2 = 0.8823
0.00
0.05
0.10
0.15
0.20
0.25
0.30
0.35
1.02 1.03 1.04 1.05 1.06 1.07 1.08 1.09 1.10
PBD/ABD (-)
CC/D
isp
ersi
bil
ity
* d/f
(-)
Plant 4 Plant 3
Plant 5
Plant 1
Plant 2
MATERIAL HANDLING
29
PELLETING/DENSIFICATION
30
PELLETING/DENSIFICATION
Mag.
x
DDGS Mfg
A B
10
60
200
31
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Percentage of DDGS Pelleted, p (%)
Tot
al S
lack
Cos
t pe
r C
ar, S
Cca
r ($
/car
)
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
Pel
leti
ng C
ost
per
Car
, Pca
r ($
/car
)
$50/ton DDGS Sales Price, s
$100/ton DDGS Sales Price, s
$150/ton DDGS Sales Price, s
$200/ton DDGS Sales Price, s
15 $/ton pelleting cost, Cop
10 $/ton pelleting cost, Cop
5 $/ton pelleting cost, Cop
a
Resulting slack costs and costs of pelleting for each rail car due to differing DDGS sales prices and annualized pelleting costa) breakeven occurs at points of intersection
PELLETING/DENSIFICATION
32
0
500
1000
1500
40 50 60 70 80
Percentage of DDGS Pelleted, p (%)
Tot
al S
lack
Cos
t per
Car
, SC
car
($/
car)
0
500
1000
1500
Pell
etin
g C
ost p
er C
ar,
Pca
r ($
/car
)
$50/ton DDGS Sales Price, s$100/ton DDGS Sales Price, s$150/ton DDGS Sales Price, s$200/ton DDGS Sales Price, s10 $/ton pelleting cost, Cop15 $/ton pelleting cost, Cop5 $/ton pelleting cost, Cop
b
PELLETING/DENSIFICATION
Resulting slack costs and costs of pelleting for each rail car due to differing DDGS sales prices and annualized pelleting costb) magnification of the intersections clearly shows the proportion of DDGS which needs to be pelleted to achieve breakeven
33
40
4045
4550
5055
5560
606565707075758080
p (
%)
p (
%)
Percent of DDGS pelleted, p (%), required to achieve breakeven increases as both DDGS Sales Price, s ($/ton), and Pelleting Cost, Cop ($/ton), increase
PELLETING/DENSIFICATION
34
35