Finding Funding: Plasco's Biggest Supporter

In an industry where finding funding for projects can feel a little like looking for a needle in a haystack, Candian energy company Plasco has an edge over the competition.

Plasco uses plasma gasification to convert MSW to energy. Plasma differs from the traditional partial oxidation process by using a plasma torch to heat the chamber to 5,000-10,000 degrees Fahrenheit. As a result, the MSW is vaporized rather than slowly combusted, as in typical partial-oxidation processes.

Plasma gasification is thought to be among the cleanest technologies on the market. The downside is that its expense eliminates it as an option for developers struggling to get financed. Luckily for Plasco, funds are one thing it doesn’t have to worry too much about, thanks in large part to financier George Soros.

Wealthy financer George Soros at the World
Economic Meeting in 2010. 

The Hungarian-American business magnate led a deal with private investors that gave Plasco a $140-million windfall in March 2011. This is the second big payday for Plasco, which totaled $110 million from investors the previous year.

“The performance of the company’s existing Ottawa plant and a strong pipeline of contract opportunities have allowed us to demonstrate to investors that our technology is proven and ready for commercial delivery,” Plasco CEO Rod Bryden said in a press release issued by the company in March.

Soros’ involvement undoubtedly gives Plasco more than just a comfortable financial backing. The support of such a well-known and savvy investor gives credibility in a market where companies are scrambling to prove why its technology is the best. The company already has one facility operating for commercial use in Ottawa and is currently working on a proposal to build a waste conversion facility in Salinas Valley, Calif.

Better BTU’s Take: We love the technology, but don’t love the cost. If it can become cost-effective as more plants get built, it could become a real contender in the large-system market. We’re also going to be keeping an eye on the announcement-to-close ratio: companies that announce a lot of projects but aren’t able to get them across the finish line only hurt the industry.

Fluidized Bed Boilers: Ol’ Reliable

EPI Fluidized Bed Boiler. Courtesy: Canadian
Biomass Magazine

In a time where the industry is buzzing with the different breeds of gasifiers, some are ready to declare older technologies, such as fluidized bed boilers, as obsolete. But before you begin designing a massive castle with all that extra sand, we’d like to examine the pros and cons of fluidized beds.

Energy Products of Idaho has built a strong foundation since producing North America’s first biomass fluidized bed in 1973. The company now boasts more than 100 installations worldwide, most recently working on two large renewable energy projects in Oregon.

EPI’s systems range from over air-blown installations, which work similarly to incinerators, to gasification through a partially-oxidized staged combustion system. The strength of its systems is the thermal flywheel, which creates efficient combustion by keeping the temperature regulated to create a stable flow of uniform gas quality.

With 38 years of experience and a proven design, EPI is the Ol’ Reliable of the renewable energy industry. It’s like the 1970s Fords that keep on rolling while some of the newer models run into a new glitch every other week.

The problem is that the high cost keeps many projects just out of reach for struggling developers. The industry badly needs a proven, low-cost entry point design to further market development. EPI could have a hard time competing with newer gasifiers once the technology is proven because they can offer attractive price points.

Although EPI does actually offer gasifiers as part of its services, the fluidized bed is its stronghold and the company believes firmly in it. Whether that will change with the tides of time remains to be seen, but we feel they have the talent to create a new age gasifier if that becomes a goal of theirs down the line.

Better BTU’s Take: Developers struggling to get newer technologies financed should definitely take a look at using an EPI fluidized bed. It may not win the battle in the long run but it’s probably the best bet for your money right now.

Waste Conversion Congress on the West Coast

The Better BTU boarded a plane headed west on Monday, headed for San Jose, Calif. and the Waste Conversion Congress. Taking place at the Convention Plaza Hotel and billed as a "thought leadership conference and an unbiased forum" we are excited to hear from experts in our rapidly growing field.

But don't miss us too much! We're tweeting live from the conference and will be posting reports and our thoughts on what we're learning twice a day on a blog we set up specifically for the occasion! 

Follow us on Twitter @BetterBTU and sign up for our blog updates to be sent straight to your email at http://thebetterbtu.blogspot.com.

Strong Company, Simple Design

PHOTO: ICM, Inc.

Leonardo da Vinci said “Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication.”

That may well be the new motto for ICM as it seeks to expand into the biomass business using partial oxidation gasifiers. The Colwich, Kan.-based company established itself through the design, construction and support of ethanol plants, now boasting over 100 successful installations.

Founded in 1995 by President and CEO Dave Vander Griend, ICM exploded onto the scene with the rise of popularity in ethanol. Looking for a way to lower emissions, Vander Griend started exploring the possibility of constructing their own gasifiers.

The company has been testing a commercial-scale demonstration model in Harvey County since 2009 and reports that it has successfully produced more than 7,000 tons of 13 different feedstocks. The biomass gasifier will be available in three different sizes ranging from 150-450 tons per day.

As with all companies, the challenge becomes finding that first buyer. ICM has chosen to keep its model simple and straightforward, developing a low-BTU syngas that is suitable for burning in a boiler. Its technology won’t appeal to everyone, but for those with a large project looking for a low-BTU syngas, ICM should fit like a glove.

While the company’s established reputation should help to soothe potential investor’s nerves, a decision to purchase any type of gasifier is a costly one. Investors want to see rock-solid feedstock, engineering, procurement and construction, as well as off-take agreements.

Better BTU Take: ICM’s established nature makes it a clear frontrunner among “partial oxidation” gasifiers.

ThermoChem Recovery: Is Bigger Always Better?

While the race to become the standard in biomass gasification amps up, ThermoChem Recovery International, is emerging as a viable contender in the large-scale technology marketplace. Using a patented steam-reforming process, the biomass feedstock reacts with steam and oxygen in the gasifier to produce a quality syngas that can be used as a replacement for fossil fuels or used as a feedstock for biofuels and biochemicals. 

TRI, located in Baltimore, Md., could move to the front of the biomass pack because its syngas ranges from 550-750 BTU per SCF. It can be direct fired in off-the-shelf gas turbines. This gives TRI an edge since more than 98 percent of the gasification systems can only produce a low-BTU syngas. This will appeal to anyone looking to do more than stick it in a boiler and burn it.

The tradeoff to the sophistication that allows for such low emissions is size and complexity. Although TRI bills it as "scalable" that can be reduced to as little as 25 MW, the technology is most economical at a minimum volume of 50 MW. For smaller developers, this could be like trying to park a Suburban in a compact parking spot. 

The company is funded and already has a project up and running in Trenton, Ontario. This gives potential investors a chance to see the technology in person and "kick the tires a bit." The company did have one failed project early on, but research shows that it was a case of licensing the design and another firm implemented it in its own way. The U.S. Department of Energy bestowed a $50 million grant as a vote of confidence in the technology. 

Better BTU Take: This is an environmentally elegant solution for large-scale projects that willing to embrace technical complexity.