Re: Research Topics

[FMurrl@aol.com]

In a message dated 4/16/02 1:19:34 PM Eastern Daylight Time, anouk@shaw.ca writes:


> I am looking for thoughts and opinions from those working in the bioenergy field. My question was what bioenergy implementation issues you see facing the global market.  
> Thinking of the 'big picture' and market competitiveness as it applies to both traditional and alternative energy fuels, what progress barriers will biomass feedstocks need to overcome if they are to achieve there maximum global potential?


Anouk:

One of our companies is considering this field, partly for our required "pro bono" effort and partly because we see some biomass based fuels going to waste at a net cost to the environment.

Our studies lead us to believe that there are two limiting factors to any energy quest:  (a) price and (b) delivery. The price issue is more obvious, because we all face price-based decisions each day. I will note here, however, that some rate payers in Connecticut have agreed to pay higher prices for green power in the past. That has probably also occurred and continues to occur in other venues. 

Delivery is also a tough issue. A good biomass energy solution won't obtain high usage without getting support from existing infrastructure or having as a backer a company or industry or government that will use existing infrastructure or tax structure to ensure the success of the potential biomass energy solution. 

Example: Car owners and boat owners won't use biomass fuels unless they are widely available. Without the biomass equivalent of "gas stations" the biomass will just be a good idea. Diesel fuel is broadly available in the US, but lack of availability is still sited as a substantial factor in the decision to buy gasoline-fired cars and boats. Biomass faces that hurdle when considered for a mass fuel (i.e., fuel for the masses). 

Example: The tax program in Section 45 of the Internal Revenue Code is there to encourage biomass use, but it hasn't. The section is too restrictive and so is more apparent than real as a solution. In this instance, cost is the big factor, while the limits of the requirements of Section 45 are also a very large portion of why the statute has not encouraged biomass use. 

In my mind, the bottom line is composed of two questions: 1. Can I get the fuel? and 2. Can I afford the fuel? If a user can't answer either question with a resounding "yes," biomass won't work. 

The governments of the world can clearly help by making biomass cheaper through the use of tax credits. A successful energy program in the U.S. has been Section 29 for the production of non-conventional fuels. If there was a similar program for biomass, this would make a big difference. Section 45 has been ineffective, since it is so very limited. 

Regards,
Fred Murrell
Bradenton Florida USA