Everything from fertilizer choice to land use changes can impact CI scores. By testing soils and minimizing manufactured nitrogen use, applying precision agriculture technologies, and leveraging field management techniques, scores can be reduced.
How far feedstock must be transported to the plant, and by which transportation method, can make a significant difference in CI, as can how far the renewable fuel products must be shipped to their final destinations.
Producers can make a significant impact on CI through the choice of steam, electricity or other plant energy sources, as well as the chemicals used in processing. In some markets, facilities can lower their CI by using carbon capture and sequestration instead of releasing carbon dioxide into the atmosphere.
Renewable fuel economics can be optimized by using feedstocks not intended for human consumption when possible. Food feedstocks hurt CI scores due to the deferred land use and fertilizer charges associated with their production. However, vegetable oil feedstock pathways such as soybean oil and canola oil tend to have a higher carbon footprint than animal fats, waste oils and cover crops.
CI scores can be improved by minimizing high-carbon inputs such as natural gas and choosing lower-carbon inputs (e.g., renewable natural gas) where they can be monetized through incentives. High-carbon inputs can be further reduced by finding alternatives to hydrogen (such as blue or green hydrogen), since both the purchase price and carbon value must be accounted for in biofuel plants.
Design is critical to setting up projects for success. For renewable fuels, this incorporates everything from feedstock selection and technology to location and partnerships. Successful financial outcomes derive from a combination of these choices to balance upfront costs against the multitude of incentives to determine the net value of any given combination.
The most significant incentives in play in the U.S. market include the long-standing federal Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) program, state-level Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS) credits, and the $1/gallon Biodiesel Production and Blending tax credit. Legislation to encourage production and adoption of SAF remains a work in progress as of mid-2022.
Three keys to preparing projects for success:
Speed to market
The choice of project delivery contracting approach can make a significant difference in how quickly and cost-effectively projects get completed. Using a design-build or engineer-procure-construct (EPC) approach enables earlier decisions, stronger collaboration, efficient management through a single source of responsibility, and overlapping phases to lock in prices early and deliver substantial time savings.
Cost assurance
Earlier pricing clarity and scope development help plant owners and contractors achieve a high enough level of cost confidence to secure funding. Contracting strategies and carefully assembled front-end planning (FEP) can improve the accuracy of estimates, with trickle-down effects through procurement and implementation.
Partner selection
Experienced, integrated partners provide owners with the depth and breadth of resources to make speed to market and cost assurance into real project outcome differentiators. Contractors with diversity in talent and disciplines, backed by a culture that prioritizes safety and emphasizes client support, are well positioned to offer innovative solutions to achieve sustainability objectives cost-effectively.
.png){kind=logo}