Ethanol and
isobutanol producer Gevo,
Inc. (GEVO: Nasdaq)
is installing equipment in its Luverne, Minnesota plant to improve efficiency
in corn processing. The company is
leasing a proprietary corn fractionation or slicing process developed Shockwave, LLC based
in DesMoines, Iowa. The new equipment is
intended to increase by-product output, including feed protein products and
food-grade corn oil. With sales of more
valuable by-products Gevo expects to improve overall profit margins. Shareholders can expect to see results after
the first quarter 2019, when the equipment installation is expected to be
complete.
Shockwave keeps
a low profile with no corporate website and no one to answer phone calls. However, there are plenty of other corn
fractionation companies that are worthy of investor scrutiny. The various technologies bring a higher level
of profitability to dry mill ethanol production by increasing efficiency in
corn feedstock utilization and creating new revenue streams. Another plus is a reduction in greenhouse gas
emissions.
Front-end corn
kernel fractionation is a new step for conventional ethanol dry-grind
production. Conventional ethanol plants
us a hammer or roller mill to grind whole corn kernels. The ground corn is missed with water and then
heated to break apart the starch polymers. Free glucose is freed from the corn starch and
then fermented into ethanol and carbon dioxide.
The non-starch portion is carried into a feed product called distillers
grains (DDGS).
It is not a very
efficient approach. Each bushel of corn
yields about 2.8 gallons of fuel ethanol and 17 pounds of DDGS. Corn is the largest expense for a dry grind
ethanol plant, leaving ethanol and chemical producers vulnerable to corn
prices.
Corn kernels
have three parts: germ, fiber and
endosperm. Fractionation before grinding
separates the three parts so that each can be used for its best attributes. The
germ is high in corn oil and its best suited as feedstock for biodiesel or even
as food-grade corn oil. The fiber or
bran is also removed, leaving the starchy part of the endosperm or grit for
fermentation into ethanol. Removal of
the germ and fiber before the grinding step affects ethanol yields because the
endosperm portion of the corn feedstock that heads to the fermentation step has
a higher concentration in starch. Then the non-fermentable portion of the
endosperm is turned into DDGS.
Fractionation
decreases the amount of DDGS by-products that have been a mainstay of ethanol
producers’ revenue streams. Those DDGS
also have lower fiber and oil content, but higher protein value. However, fractionation does lead to an even
higher-protein by-product that commands higher selling prices. The resulting high-protein grains stream or
HPGS has a wider market, including hog and poultry feed as well as ruminants. It
has similar composition to soy bean meal and is suitable for monogastric
animals. Thus even though DDGS has
represented as much as a quarter of ethanol producers profits in recent years,
the addition of HPGS is expected to deliver even higher sales and profits.
A study
described in an issue of Applied Biochemistry and Biotechnology determined that
return on investment in front-end corn fractionation equipment increased by 2%
on a hypothetical 40-million-gallon per year plant. Increased ethanol production and new higher
protein DDGS by-products help to offset hefty capital costs associated with
the additional equipment. It also
provides an opportunity for Gevo and other ethanol producers to break into
different animal feed markets.
Bio-Process Group based in Indiana is a self-described engineering solutions company.
Among other processes for natural fibers, the company offers its Modular High
Value (MHV) biorefining system for corn ethanol production. The system integrates fractionation,
separation, fermentation and conversion technologies.
Oil seeds of all
kinds are the specialty of Crown Iron Works headquartered in
Minnesota. It claims to be the largest producer in North America of equipment
used in oil seed preparation, processing and refining. Crown’s corn fractionation process begins
with a tempering step that enables the corn kernels to absorb enough moisture
for the fracturing step. The process
focuses on the starchy endosperm or grit part of the kernel, sending that off
to the fermentation process at the ethanol plant. The germ is then converted into high protein
animal feed or edible oil.
In case anyone has
missed the point, ethanol producers are keen on maximizing the amount of pure fermentable
starch from their corn feedstock purchases.
Cereal Process
Technologies, LLC makes this concept the core marketing
message for its corn fractionation equipment.
CPT claims its system leads to purer germ and bran streams that command
higher prices in the market for ethanol production by-products. Another point
in their pitch to ethanol producers is lower energy costs since corn components
that cannot be turned into ethanol are not put through the fermentation
process.
No doubt there
are other sources for corn fractionation equipment. Most likely those sources of private held
just like the three mentioned here.
Perhaps the most important takeaway here is the need for ethanol
producers to adopt processes to make their plants more efficient. For price-taking competitive industry, cost
reduction and efficiency are keys to success.
Investors may be
hearing more about investment in operational efficiencies by ethanol products. More than 80% of corn ethanol plants in the
U.S. are dry grind and they are all under pressure to maximize profits. Gevo has not yet achieved sufficient scale to
deliver profits from its ethanol and isobutanol products. The company reported a 60% operating loss in
the twelve months ending June 2018.
However, the corn fractionation equipment can help move the needle to
that end. The unique lease agreement
with the elusive Shockwave equipment supplier means Gevo can also conserve its
capital resources. Gevo had $27 million
in cash on its balance sheet at the end of June 2018, but needs at least $1.25
million per month in cash to keep operations going.
Neither the author of the Small Cap Strategist web
log, Crystal Equity Research nor its affiliates have a beneficial interest in
the companies mentioned herein.
No comments:
Post a Comment