[Gasification] Range Fuels Closing Plant

Wed Jan 26 12:31:14 CST 2011

Dear Jim

Greg says, among other things, :
This is where our tax dollars are diverted into non economic production 
of a fuel additive which supposedly saves us from climate change.

There was an interesting Science program on CBC on 15 Jan, on Climate Change. A reference URL to the Program is:
http://www.cbc.ca/quirks/episode/2011/01/15/january-15-2011/

They have one clip on "Climate 3000". Scroll down and click on "Listen to this Item".

It would appear from this article that we cannot be "saved from Climate Change."

Best wishes,

Kevin
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Jim Leach 
  To: 'Discussion of biomass pyrolysis and gasification' ; mark at ludlow.com 
  Sent: Wednesday, January 26, 2011 1:18 PM
  Subject: Re: [Gasification] Range Fuels Closing Plant

  That is a pretty nasty and bold claim, do you have any facts to back that up?

  JAMES T. LEACH, P.E.
  President

  DANA TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
  32242 Paseo Adelanto, Suite D
  San Juan Capistrano, CA 92675
  Ph 949-496-6516
  Fx 949-496-8133
  Mobile 949-933-6518

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  From: gasification-bounces at lists.bioenergylists.org [mailto:gasification-bounces at lists.bioenergylists.org] On Behalf Of GF
  Sent: Tuesday, January 25, 2011 10:41 AM
  To: mark at ludlow.com; gasification at lists.bioenergylists.org
  Subject: Re: [Gasification] Range Fuels Closing Plant

                                 Government Grants and Ethanol.

  I think we all agree on: THE GREAT ETHANOL SWINDLE.
  This is where our tax dollars are diverted into non economic production 
  of a fuel additive which supposedly saves us from climate change.
  The primary players in this scam have made sure their methods together with the cash cow they have created "REMAINS INTACT"
  The last thing they desire is a new and more efficient system to be discovered or adopted.
  So how do they protect their interests?
  Quite simply, take control of any new committees  responsible for the selection of grants which might produce an alternative to their scam.
  How could such a wasteful and useless system be chosen for Federal Investment unless the people on the committee had an agenda which also included the grant seekers.
  The naivety of those who believe that poor judgment on the part of the perpetrators is the primary cause of such "losses" should have their voting rights revoked.
  There are no accidents or poor judgment in politics. That is the excuse generated by a stupid and trusting electorate.
  It will not matter how merit worthy your claim is for grant money, it will not be considered worthy if it challenges an established "funded" system. 
  It might be chosen if it has "floors", in which case, be prepared to share it with at least one member of the committee.

  GF

  -----Original Message-----
  From: Mark Ludlow <mark at ludlow.com>
  To: 'Discussion of biomass pyrolysis and gasification' <gasification at lists.bioenergylists.org>
  Sent: Tue, Jan 25, 2011 11:20 am
  Subject: Re: [Gasification] Range Fuels Closing Plant

  Tom writes: Wonder why anyone stays in this field?

  Reply: It pays well.

  From: gasification-bounces at lists.bioenergylists.org [mailto:gasification-bounces at lists.bioenergylists.org] On Behalf Of LINVENT at aol.com
  Sent: Tuesday, January 25, 2011 6:27 AM
  To: tmiles at trmiles.com; gasification at lists.bioenergylists.org
  Subject: Re: [Gasification] Range Fuels Closing Plant

  Dear Technologists,
       The failure or whatever it is spun by Mr. Klepper in the article announcing the closure of the plant, is by itself devastating to the industry. Without a successfully operating plant, the industry has no positive markers for the investment community. Do you think that the financing group would do another bio-refinery after putting up the money for this plant? 
       What is more difficult is that nowhere in the technical review community used to fund this plant was the critical eye which said "It won't work". Of course, the developers may have shopped the technical review until they got what they wanted to hear. The DOE is quite apparently not able to make the distinction as they approved the funding. This also means that a successful technology would not be known by them. It takes a winner to know a winner. 
        I had early meetings with parts of the Klepper movement. A small private group which had put $1+mm into the project and were basically abandoneed when the technology was sold to another group for development. Their concerns were the reactor design which apparently relied upon a mechanical system which they didn't think would scale well. Not knowing what the issues with the plant not operating, this may have been a contributing factor. They also said that they were sticking with it and just picking my brains which I suspected and didn't contribute anything of significance. 
        There were also issues with the catalyst. Reports that it produced only ethanol using the proprietary catalyst were suspect as most of the catalysts for ethanol production produce methanol also. The press statement that they ran a methanol batch first and then an ethanol batch, are interesting in this regard. 
        DOE is doing a lot of soul searching at the behest of the White House because of the dearth of bio-energy project successes. Political pressure will not make it happen, money will not make it happen, but a serious well developed , innovative, simple process and technology will. 
       Below are some of the massive failures:
  Occidental's flash pyrolysis unit in Sad Diego: $100mm
  Britestar/EDL pyrolysis unit in Australia: $200mm
  Range Fuels: $300mm
  Molten Metals: $90mm(mostly DOE earmarked funds)
  Hawaii IGT/EPRI/Westinghouse/HPL/ gasification unit: $30-50mm?
  Battelle's dual fluidized bed gasification system: $60mm? 
  Thermoselect's two stage combustion system: $125mm/plant 4-5 plants except for the one in Japan which I think is still operating. 
  PRM's Philadelphia sewage sludge gasification system: $2-3mm (blew up and was shut down very shortly after installation, I was called to see if wanted the plant for scrap).
  Italian sawdust gasification plant near Venice, 1 Mwe couldn't get an engine to run more than 40 hours between valve jobs due to tar fouling of intake valves. 
  Farmland's acquisition of the Daggett, California Texaco coal gasification 144 Mwe power plant and reconstituting it in Coffeville, Kansas to run on pet coke for ammonia production. Texaco was thrown out of the project, Farmland finished the plant got it running on petcoke, had to file bankruptcy and sell the 1100 ton/day ammonia production unit using it to a separate entity. 
       The list goes on and on. 
       Wonder why anyone stays in this field? 

  Sincerely,
  Leland T. "Tom" Taylor
  President
  Thermogenics Inc.
  505.463.8422
  www.thermogenics.com

_______________________________________________
Gasification mailing list

to Send a Message to the list, use the email address
Gasification at bioenergylists.org

to UNSUBSCRIBE or Change your List Settings use the web page
http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/gasification_lists.bioenergylists.org

for more Gasifiers,  News and Information see our web site:
http://gasifiers.bioenergylists.org/

  __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature database 5821 (20110126) __________

  The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.

  http://www.eset.com

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

  _______________________________________________
  Gasification mailing list

  to Send a Message to the list, use the email address
  Gasification at bioenergylists.org

  to UNSUBSCRIBE or Change your List Settings use the web page
  http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/gasification_lists.bioenergylists.org

  for more Gasifiers,  News and Information see our web site:
  http://gasifiers.bioenergylists.org/

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

  No virus found in this message.
  Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
  Version: 10.0.1202 / Virus Database: 1435/3404 - Release Date: 01/26/11
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/gasification_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20110126/a9d86c73/attachment.html>