- Related Stories
Start-up to produce cheaper ethanol with microbeAugust 14, 2007
Cellulosic ethanol: A fuel for the future?August 14, 2007
Cellulosic ethanol plant to open next yearJuly 2, 2007
Making ethanol out of biodiesel byproductsJune 26, 2007
Fuels industry seeks its 'ethanol 2.0'January 25, 2007
Bush pushes energy regulations, ethanolJanuary 23, 2007
Toyota branches out into ethanolOctober 10, 2006
Ethanol maker pops in public offeringJune 14, 2006
Ethanol car wins fuel efficiency challengeMay 22, 2006
- Related Blogs
Mascoma: Why all the different ethanol plants?
September 24, 2007
The cellulosic ethanol road map from Mascoma's CEO
September 25, 2007
Microsoft alum shows his ethanol race car
September 12, 2007
An ethanol injection for diesel engines
August 1, 2007
Ethanol maker Mascoma heads for the forests
November 29, 2006
Financiers question corn's day in sun for ethanol
June 20, 2007
A new source for ethanol: Coal
August 13, 2007
Will ethanol increase health problems in the U.S.?
April 18, 2007
One of the biggest lessons comes from the ethanol experience. Smart venture capitalists saw the promise and potential of this corn-based fuel early, and they invested shrewdly and successfully.
But success in ethanol has become a two-edged sword. Strong valuations and the prospect of robust returns--yes, for sure; but also big demand for corn and a commodity price run-up that has made it economically difficult for more players to enter the ethanol market and more deals to get done--especially with guaranteed back-end output contracts on the horizon.
There's an important takeaway here for investors; the moral of the sustainable-energy story, if you will. Simply put, before we do clean-technology deals, it's essential that we gain reasonable access to supply inputs and lock-in prices.
Another insight from the ethanol experience is that we need to start broadening our thinking when it comes to alternative-energy inputs.
Feed stocks like corn have multiple outputs and are, therefore, price-sensitive--as we've learned. But garbage or sewage, for example, are plentiful, must be disposed of and have limited economic outputs. The bottom line is that they may prove to be less risky investments than corn-based ethanol. Algae, which can be grown quickly and more cost-effectively than corn, palm or canola, might also offer less risk.
There are several companies that already understand this.
GreenFuel Technologies, for example, is a pioneer in the development of algae bioreactor technology that converts the carbon dioxide in smokestack gases into clean, renewable biofuels.
GreenShift uses proprietary technologies--including innovative desiccation, process intensification, gasification, catalytic and carbon capture--to enable the refining of many forms of biomass into clean fuels.
A third company worth considering is XL Renewables, which is developing a $260 million biorefinery on 2,700 acres about 100 miles west of Phoenix. The biorefinery will efficiently and cost-effectively produce high-grade ethanol, biodiesel, milk and dairy products, as well as animal feed. XL Renewables has also developed proprietary technology to produce large quantities of algae biomass for use as a feedstock for ethanol and biodiesel production.
I'm convinced that when the history of the clean-technology revolution is ultimately written, the investing heroes--the players who made money and a difference--will be the ones who controlled the raw materials on a sustained basis. Let me say it another way: in real estate, the linchpin for financial success is location, location, location; in sustainable energy, it's inputs, inputs, inputs.
Michael Butler is the chief executive of . Neither Butler nor his firm have any interests in the companies mentioned in this column.
44 commentsJoin the conversation! Add your comment