Reviewer Comments - EERE

More documents

Recommendations

Info

2011 Algae Platform Review – Reviewer Comments Reviewer Comments are direct transcripts of commentary and material provided by the Platform’s Review Panel. They have not been edited or altered by the Biomass Program. coastal/forested areas. However, it is unclear that this type of local resource utilization project could be scaled to meet significant transportation needs. The resources under investigation in this project are too limited to provide significant volume of product for transportation. Several of such biomass sources would be needed to produce even a modest amount of fuel. However, these biomass resources are available and already alkali pretreated, thus they make for a good starting place to test and demonstrate the conversion pathways. It appears that the potential fuel volumes form this process are very small. The mixed alcohols produced may have unique characteristics which, combined with the small volumes, make it a nuisance for fuel production. Certainly the volumes we are looking at are small and they have value more as demonstration feedstocks than commercial opportunities. The nuisance is important. I think that if fuels are the final target then hydrotreatment of the mixed alcohols to gasoline range hydrocarbons (which has been demonstrated) would be the most likley way to go to market. Such hydrotreatment was not within the scope of this project. 4. Critical Success Factors The project has identified critical factors, (including technical, business, market, regulatory, and legal factors) that impact the potential technical and commercial success of the project The project has presented adequate plans to recognize, address, and overcome these factors The project has the opportunity to advance the state of technology and impact the viability of commercial algal biomass feedstock supply and conversion, through one or more of the following: i. Cross-Cutting Analysis (ex. economic analysis, sustainability analysis, resource assessments, risk assessments) ii. Feedstock Supply R&D (ex. biology, cultivation, resource use, biomass characteristics, harvesting/dewatering) iii. Downstream Refining R&D (ex. extraction, conversion, fuel, products, fuel/product infrastructure and end-use) iv. Environmental sustainability (example: water use, GMOs, energy consumption) Reviewer Comments Reviewer: 1 Criteria Score: 6 There is an extensive list of CSFs and how they are addressed. Challenges are also tabulated and discussed. Reviewer: 3 Criteria Score: 7 Higher fermentation concentrations needed. Reviewer: 5 Criteria Score: 7 Demonstrated completion of critical success factors and technology transfer--seems to have addressed them well. Reviewer: 6 Criteria Score: 8 I really liked the net energy balances that were calculated. A lot of time was devoted to the factors being Page 74 of 223
2011 Algae Platform Review – Reviewer Comments Reviewer Comments are direct transcripts of commentary and material provided by the Platform’s Review Panel. They have not been edited or altered by the Biomass Program. evaluated, and the PI had reasonably targeted appropriate criteria, from fermentation titres and yields thorugh legal regulation. The energy balance, however, was most appreciated. Reviewer: 7 Criteria Score: 4 Potentially low volume of fuels combined with the end-use of mixed alcohol might be additonal success factors to be addressed. Presenter Response Higher fermentation concentrations needed. Agreed. Potentially low volume of fuels combined with the end-use of mixed alcohol might be additonal success factors to be addressed. Agreed. Scale would need to be increased for commercial operation. Mixed alcohols may need to be hydrotreated to gasoline hydrocarbon. 5. Technology Transfer and Collaborations Please comment on the degree to which the project adequately interfaces and coordinates with other institutions and projects to provide additional benefits to the Biomass Program, such as publications, awards, or others. Reviewer Comments Reviewer: 1 It is not easily determined if the deliverables and conclusions are of value to the OBP program or not. There are many details that would need evaluating to ultimately determine the value of the outcomes. It is believed that publications will be an output. Reviewer: 3 Working closely with OTFF. FMC option looks less promising (low titer). Terrabon relationship is developing. Reviewer: 5 Collaboration and technology transfer were still in process. Reviewer: 6 I did not get a strong feel for this. Reviewer: 7 Widespread sharing through many publications. Presenter Response It is not easily determined if the deliverables and conclusions are of value to the OBP program or not. There are many details that would need evaluating to ultimately determine the value of the outcomes. It is believed that publications will be an output. Publications (non-peer reviewed) have been produced. Manuscripts are in preparation for submission to peer reviewed publications. Page 75 of 223
Page 1 and 2:
2011 Biomass Program Algae Platform
Page 3 and 4:
2011 Algae Platform Review - Review
Page 5 and 6:
Page 7 and 8:
Page 9 and 10:
Page 11 and 12:
Page 13 and 14:
Page 15 and 16:
Page 17 and 18:
Page 19 and 20:
Page 21 and 22:
Page 23 and 24: 2011 Algae Platform Review - Review
Page 73: 2011 Algae Platform Review - Review
Page 125 and 126:
Page 127 and 128:
Page 129 and 130:
Page 131 and 132:
Page 133 and 134:
Page 135 and 136:
Page 137 and 138:
Page 139 and 140:
Page 141 and 142:
Page 143 and 144:
Page 145 and 146:
Page 147 and 148:
Page 149 and 150:
Page 151 and 152:
Page 153 and 154:
Page 155 and 156:
Page 157 and 158:
Page 159 and 160:
Page 161 and 162:
Page 163 and 164:
Page 165 and 166:
Page 167 and 168:
Page 169 and 170:
Page 171 and 172:
Page 173 and 174:
Page 175 and 176:
Page 177 and 178:
Page 179 and 180:
Page 181 and 182:
Page 183 and 184:
Page 185 and 186:
Page 187 and 188:
Page 189 and 190:
Page 191 and 192:
Page 193 and 194:
Page 195 and 196:
Page 197 and 198:
Page 199 and 200:
Page 201 and 202:
Page 203 and 204:
Page 205 and 206:
Page 207 and 208:
Page 209 and 210:
Page 211 and 212:
Page 213 and 214:
Page 215 and 216:
Page 217 and 218:
Page 219 and 220:
Page 221 and 222:
Page 223:
show all

Reviewer Comments - EERE

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?