DOCSLIB.ORG

Market Report Prices Are Down but Demand Remains Strong

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Market Report Prices Are Down but Demand Remains Strong RenderThe International Magazine of Rendering April 2016 Market Report Prices are down but demand remains strong Food Waste Recycling Challenges West Coast Renderers Policy Matters to California Biodiesel Haarslev Business Areas tProtein tEnvironment tAfter-Sales and Service Haarslev Industries Replacement Rotors Haarslev Industries is the world’s largest manufacturer of equipment for the rendering industry. Our replacement rotors are built to the highest standard and the performance will in many cases exceed the original factory specifications. Haarslev Inc. 9700 NW Conant Avenue, Kansas City, MO 64153 Tel. (816) 799-0808 tFax (816) 799-0812 E-mail: [email protected] tWeb: www.haarslev.com (SFFOTCPSP /$t#FMMFWJMMF ,4 1FSIBN ./t4IFMMNBO (" APPLIED KNOWLEDGE At Kemin, we know what works and how to apply it. Best of all, we can prove it. Through our knowledge and experience, we have built valuable relationships that allow us to provide unique product solutions and services to the rendering industry. From our Naturox® and PET-OX® Brand Antioxidants to custom application equipment to our Customer Service Laboratory, you can trust the Kemin brand to go above and beyond. Contact a Kemin rendering expert for more information. 1-877-890-1462 WWW.KEMIN.COM © Kemin Industries, Inc. and its group of companies 2014. All rights reserved. ® ™ Trademarks of Kemin Industries, Inc., U.S.A. Contents April 2016 Volume 45, Number 2 Features 10 Market Report Prices are down but demand remains strong. 16 Food Waste Recycling Challenges West Coast renderers. 18 Battle for Meat Products In the Golden State. On the Cover A look at how the US rendering 20 Focus Shifting Away industry fared in 2015. p. 10 From biofuels in Europe? Photo by Don Schimmel www.donschimmelphotography.com 42 Policy Matters To California biodiesel. Departments 6 View from Washington Editorial Offices More of the same in an election year. 1621 Glen Dr. Placerville, CA 95667 8 Newsline Phone: (530) 306-6792 Training in preparation for FSMA compliance. Fax: (530) 644-8429 [email protected] 23 National Renderers Association www.rendermagazine.com Membership directory. Editor and Publisher Tina Caparella 46 From the Association Associate Editor Lindsay O’Connor Rendering and politics: NRA’s yearly fly-in. Magazine Production Sierra Publishing 48 Biofuels Bulletin Contact the National Renderers Association at REG buys Sanimax biodiesel plant. 500 Montgomery St., Ste. 310, Alexandria, VA 22314 (703) 683-0155 Fax (571) 970-2279 50 International Report [email protected] Modernizing global customs codes. http://nationalrenderers.org Render (ISSN 0090-8932) is published bimonthly under 51 Mark Your Calendar the auspices of the National Renderers Association by Sierra Publishing, 1621 Glen Dr., Placerville, CA 95667 52 FPRF Research Wrap-up as a public service to the North American and global Climbing out of the valley of death. rendering industry. It is intended to provide a vehicle for exchange of ideas and information pertaining to the rendering and the associated industries. Render 54 Labor and the Law is distributed free of charge to qualified individuals Zika and employer liability issues. upon written request. Publisher reserves the right to determine qualification. Periodical postage paid for at 58 People, Places, and... Camino, CA, and additional mailing offices. © 2016 All rights reserved. 60 Classifieds Printed in USA POSTMASTER: Send address changes to Render, P.O. Box 1319, Camino, CA 95709-1319. 4 April 2016 Render www.rendermagazine.com Rendertorial A leer sent by “snail mail” brought a flash from the past recently – a copy of the December 1975 cover of Render. The individual who sent it received the magazine 40 years ago as an employee of a large rendering company and he wished to restart his subscription all these years later. Of course we signed him right up! The feature in that parcular issue so long ago was “economic review,” which today is called the “market report” and highlighted in every April issue. The cover image of an old calculator and handwrien bank checks piqued this editor’s interest about what the industry was facing four decades earlier. Fortunately, it wasn’t difficult to unearth a copy here at Render’s offices. Editor Frank Burnham’s words depicted 1975 as “perhaps the most tumultuous and trying in the history of the US rendering industry.” Adjecves used by industry insiders to describe that year included “uncertain,” “disappoinng,” and “dismal.” Besides a struggling consumer economy, the cost of doing business for renderers jumped 20 to 30 percent – mostly due to new air and water regulaons – Asian markets “went to pot” while other foreign markets floundered, and production dropped significantly. Prices for tallow were as low as 11½ cents per pound while meat and bone meal dropped to $125 per ton. On the plus side, domesc consumpon of tallow was the highest it had been in almost 30 years. Fast forward 40 years and renderers seemed to be challenged once again. Fat prices are down 50 percent from their highs just four years ago, export markets have declined, and West Coast renderers are losing fat and bone material to a new “food waste” movement. Average prices for tallow were 26 cents per pound while meat and bone meal was $368 per ton. On the bright side, demand for rendered products remains high, raw material supplies are on the upswing due to heavier livestock animals, and renderers remain united to bale the challenges coming their way. So whether it is 1975 or 2015, the trials and tribulaons of rendering will continue and Render will be here to cover it all. R www.rendermagazine.com Render April 2016 5 View from Washington By Steve Kopperud, SLK Strategies More of the Same in an Election Year As you read this, a July 18, 2016, deadline is looming. Senator Mike Enzi (R-WY), chair of the Budget Commiee, That is when the United States (US) Congress will effecvely admitted he will continue to play with the numbers this disappear for most of the summer and a good chunk of the summer but will not be producing a formal Senate budget. autumn to tend to the business of polical party nominang On the House side, the conservave wing of the Republican convenons and November elecons. The common “wisdom” membership is pushing to hold the line on any increase in in Washington, DC, is that if legislative business is not discreonary spending unless lawmakers are willing to cut concluded by the me lawmakers flee the city in July, most entlement programs – Medicare, Social Security, veterans’ of the unfinished business will be punted into either the post- benefits, and so forth – by an equal amount over the next two elecon lame duck session or the 115th Congress convening years. However, the far-right House Freedom Caucus opposes in January 2017. the move and wants to simply reduce overall discreonary For the full House of Representaves and one-third of the spending rather than hold the line at FY 2016 levels in exchange Senate, the primary goal is reelecon in November, meaning for cuts elsewhere. to the extent polically possible, all controversial issues must As to the actual spending bills, House and Senate be avoided. For 100 percent of Congress and five White House leadership have vowed to return to “regular order” in their aspirants, it comes down to who is in polical charge of the handling of FY 2017 appropriaons. This means the respecve federal government when the dust seles in November. In appropriations committees have begun the conventional a perfect GOP world – and based on the numbers – control process of listening to various secretaries and agency heads translates to a Republican president and a Republican- explain why they need more money, and these commiees controlled Congress. To the Democrats, the numbers tell the will then go through the process of approving the dozen party its goal is to take back the Senate while pung one of bills. History tells us “regular order” is at best aspiraonal. their own in the White House for another four years. Congress has enacted all 12 appropriaons bills only four mes However, while 535 lawmakers and one former Secretary since 1977, and the last me lawmakers did what they were of State chase votes, industry broadly is increasingly concerned supposed to do was in 1997. about just how much legislave work will get done this year. While some of the spending measures – military and Among issues hanging fire are several closely watched by the homeland security for instance – may see a floor vote in both rendering industry. chambers, most will not. What Congress will inevitably wind At the top of the list is fiscal year (FY) 2017 federal up doing, because it is an elecon year and lawmakers hate spending and whether Congress will fully fund the Market explaining spending in an elecon year, is cobble together yet Access Program and the Foreign Market Development another connuing resoluon that will keep the government program. Second on the spending list is how much money the operang past September 30, the end of the fiscal year, and Food and Drug Administraon, US Department of Agriculture likely well into December. That means the heavy li ing – the FY (USDA), and Environmental Protecon Agency (EPA) will get 2017 omnibus spending bill – will be slapped together during and how Congress will tell them to spend it. The answer to the post-elecon/end-of-session lame duck. The spending the first concern is “yes,” but the answer to the second is numbers will look remarkably like the omnibus spending bill unknown. enacted last December. On the money side, in a perfect procedural world, first House Speaker Paul Ryan (R-WI) sll dreams of doing Congress enacts a FY 2017 budget resoluon and then it enacts some form of federal tax reform this year.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Final Report Annex XXXIV: Biomass-Derived Diesel Fuels Task
    Final Report Annex XXXIV: Biomass-Derived Diesel Fuels Task 1: Analysis of Biodiesel Options Ralph McGill Fuels, Engines, and Emissions Consulting Paivi Aakko-Saksa Nils-Olof Nylund TransEnergy Consulting, Ltd. June 2008 Name of report: Final Report - Analysis of Biodiesel Options Report number: Date: June 2008 Pages: 150 pages Responsible person: Dr. Ralph McGill Author(s): Ralph McGill, Päivi Aakko-Saksa, and Nils-Olof Nylund Client: IEA Advanced Motor Fuels Implementing Agreement Publicity: Date of public release: May 2009 2 Executive Summary Biofuels are fuels that are made from biomass, and biomass can be defined as any plant related material that has captured energy of sun by photosynthesis. Biomass can be divided into three categories: woody biomass, non-woody biomass, and organic waste. The word, biodiesel, refers to a fuel made from biomass that has properties similar to those of petroleum-based diesel fuels. More specifically though, in common use today, the word refers to a fuel that is a mixture of fatty acid alkyl esters and made from vegetable oils, animal fats, or recycled greases. However, today biodiesel produced by hydrotreatment oil and fats is already commercially available, and Biomass-to-Liquids (BTL) biodiesel produced by gasification is under heavy development. Part A, Biodiesel – Fatty Acid Esters Use of vegetable oils as motor fuels is not new. They were used during the oil shortages in the 1930s and 40s, and in the latter part of the 20th century attention in Europe and North America turned to the potential for replacement of petroleum diesel fuel with fuels derived from vegetable oils.
    [Show full text]
  • US and Tennessee Biodiesel Production
    UU..SS.. aanndd TTeennnneesssseeee BBiiooddiieesseell PPrroodduuccttiioonn –– 22000077 IInndduussttrryy UUppddaattee Report prepared for USDA Rural Development By the Agri-Industry Modeling & Analysis Group, Kim Jensen, Jamey Menard, and Burton C. English August 2007 Department of Agricultural Economics, The University of Tennessee Knoxville, Tennessee* *Funding provided in part by USDA Rural Development. U.S. and Tennessee Biodiesel Production – 2007 Industry Update Kim Jensen, Jamey Menard, and Burton C. English* Executive Summary As of May 2007, there were 148 biodiesel companies that had an annual production capacity of 1.39 billion gallons per year. In addition, another 96 companies have stated their plants are currently under construction and are scheduled to be completed within the next 18 months with five plants expanding their existing operations. The added capacity from new plants and expansion of plants would total an additional 1.89 billion gallons per year of biodiesel production capacity. If these two numbers are summed, the annual production capacity by year end 2008 could be as high as 3.3 billion gallons. U.S. biodiesel production was estimated at about 250 million gallons in 2006, an increase of 175 million gallons from 2005 production levels of 75 million gallons. As of late 2006, Tennessee had less than ten facilities producing biodiesel, however, plans for additional facilities were underway. As of August 2007, there were a total of 750 stations which sold biodiesel. As can be seen in Table 18, North Carolina, South Carolina, Texas, and Missouri have the largest number of stations. Tennessee has 39 stations. Recently, the national average price of diesel was around $2.96, while the average price of biodiesel (B100) was $3.27, for a price wedge of $.31/gallon.
    [Show full text]
  • (LCA) of Biofuels and Land Use Change with the GREET® Model
    Life Cycle Analysis (LCA) of Biofuels and Land Use Change with the GREET® Model drhgfdjhngngfmhgmghmghjmghfmf Hoyoung Kwon and Uisung Lee Systems Assessment Center Energy Systems Division Argonne National Laboratory The GREET Introduction Workshop Argonne National Laboratory, October 15, 2019 Biofuel Pathways in GREET and Land Use Change and Land Management Effects in CCLUB GREET includes various biomass feedstocks, conversion technologies, and fuels for biofuel LCA Grains, sugars, and Fermentation, Indirect Gasification Ethanol, butanol cellulosics Fermentation Hydrothermal Liquefaction Renewable diesel or jet Pyrolysis Waste plastics Waste CO2 Alcohol to Jet Waste CO2 Organic waste Anaerobic Digestion Natural gas and derivatives feedstock Combustion Electricity Combustion Pyrolysis, Fermentation, Cellulosics Drop-in hydrocarbon fuels Gasification (e.g., FT) Aviation and marine fuels Gasification (e.g., FT), Alcohol to Jet, Sugar to Jet Hydroprocessing Algae and oil crops Transesterification Biodiesel Renewable diesel Hydroprocessing, Hydrothermal Liquefaction The system boundary of biofuel LCA Well to Wheels Well to Pump Pump to Wheels Energy and material inputs Farm input Feedstock Feedstock Conversion to Biofuel Biofuel manufacturing production transport biofuel transport combustion Considers GHG emissions from LUC for different biofuel pathways Land Use Change . Carbon Calculator for Land Use change from Biofuels production (CCLUB) . Feedstock average soil C and soil nitrous oxide (N2O) Land Management Practices Carbon Calculator
    [Show full text]
  • Developments in the Use of Lipase Transesterification for Biodiesel
    applied sciences Review Developments in the Use of Lipase Transesterification for Biodiesel Production from Animal Fat Waste 1, 2 2, Fidel Toldrá-Reig y , Leticia Mora and Fidel Toldrá * 1 Instituto de Tecnología Química (CSIC-UPV), Universitat Politècnica de València, Camino de Vera s/n, 46022 Valencia, Spain; [email protected] 2 Instituto de Agroquímica y Tecnología de Alimentos (CSIC), Avenue Agustín Escardino 7, Paterna, 46980 Valencia, Spain; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +34-9639-000-22 Current address: CNRS, 25 rue des Martyrs, B.P. 166, 38042 Grenoble CEDEX 9, France. y Received: 30 June 2020; Accepted: 21 July 2020; Published: 23 July 2020 Abstract: Biodiesel constitutes an attractive source of energy because it is renewable, biodegradable, and non-polluting. Up to 20% biodiesel can be blended with fossil diesel and is being produced and used in many countries. Animal fat waste represents nearly 6% of total feedstock used to produce biodiesel through alkaline catalysis transesterification after its pretreatment. Lipase transesterification has some advantages such as the need of mild conditions, absence of pretreatment, no soap formation, simple downstream purification process and generation of high quality biodiesel. A few companies are using liquid lipase formulations and, in some cases, immobilized lipases for industrial biodiesel production, but the efficiency of the process can be further improved. Recent developments on immobilization support materials such as nanoparticles and magnetic nanomaterials have demonstrated high efficiency and potential for industrial applications. This manuscript reviews the latest advances on lipase transesterification and key operational variables for an efficient biodiesel production from animal fat waste.
    [Show full text]
  • Fats, Oils and Greases to Biodiesel: Technology Development and Sustainability Assessment
    Fats, Oils and Greases to Biodiesel: Technology Development and Sustainability Assessment A dissertation submitted to Department of Biomedical, Chemical and Environmental Engineering Division of Graduate Studies University of Cincinnati In partial fulfillment of the requirement for the degree of DOCTORATE OF PHILOSOPHY 2015 By Qingshi Tu B.E. in Environmental Engineering, University of Shanghai for Science and Technology, 2008 M.S. in Environmental Engineering, University of Cincinnati, 2012 Committee: Mingming Lu, PhD (Chair) Tim Keener, PhD Ting Lu, PhD Drew C. McAvoy, PhD Raymond Smith, PhD Abstract Fats, oils and greases (FOG) in the wastewater stream have long been a nuisance to the environment because they clog sewer pipes, causing overflows and damages. FOG can be classified as trap grease if obtained directly from food services, or sewer grease if mixed with FOG in the sewer system. This dissertation evaluated the technical feasibility and several sustainability parameters of converting trap/sewer grease into biodiesel. This waste-to-energy practice can provide the dual benefit of waste reduction and biofuel production. Monte Carlo simulations were conducted to model the energy consumption and GHG emissions from trap grease-to-biodiesel production life cycle at a wastewater treatment plant. Results were highly dependent on both the trap grease properties (e.g., FOG concentration, free fatty acid (FFA) concentration, etc.) and the utilization of non-lipid fraction of the FOG. Trap grease can provide lower energy consumption and lower GHG emissions for biodiesel production when compared to other feedstocks. This is particularly true for the trap grease with high FOG concentrations, low FFA concentrations, and a high performance anaerobic digestor (AD).
    [Show full text]
  • Utilization of Fats, Oils and Grease in Biodiesel Production
    Utilization of Fats, Oils and Grease in Biodiesel Production: From Market Study to Technical Feasibility A thesis submitted to Department of Chemical and Environmental Engineering Division of Graduate Studies University of Cincinnati In partial fulfillment of the requirement for the degree of Master of Science 2017 Junsong Zhang B.E. in Mechanical Engineering, Shandong University, 2014 Committee: Mingming Lu, PhD (Chair) Drew McAvoy, PhD Maobing Tu, PhD Fumin Ren, PhD i Abstract The biodiesel industry has continued to boom in the past few decades and new technologies have been developed to handle low-cost feedstocks. Fats, oils and grease (FOG), a nuisance to the environment, has attracted increasing attention in biodiesel production in recent years. This thesis started with a market feasibility study on FOG management in wastewater treatment plants (WWTPs) to determine the potential market from FOG to biodiesel. Furthermore, a greener alternative titration method for measuring acid numbers in FOG was developed. Lastly, the challenges of reducing sulfur content from FOG to biodiesel are also investigated using three different types of FOG. The purpose of this thesis is to evaluate the utilization of FOG in biodiesel production, from the perspective of market to technical feasibility. We conducted a survey of 29 WWTPs, which indicated that the preferred method of FOG handling depends on geographical location. Landfill is still the major FOG disposal method (76.23% of capacity) followed by anaerobic digestion (12.29%) and incineration (11.48%). Furthermore, FOG processing technology also needs to be custom developed based on each location and each WWTP. A potential market of WWTP-FOG for biodiesel production could be achieved by reducing the current disposal cost significantly and producing environmental- friendly biodiesel.
    [Show full text]
  • Trends in the Used Cooking Oil (UCO) Market: a Report by ECOFYS
    Trends in the UCO market - Input to DRAFT PIR – Trends in the UCO market - Input to DRAFT PIR – By: Gemma Toop, Sacha Alberici, Matthias Spoettle, Huygen van Steen Date: 11 November 2013 Project number: BIOUK10553 © Ecofys 2013 by order of: Department for Transport (DfT) ECOFYS UK Ltd. | 1 Alie Street | London E1 8DE | T +44 (0)20 74230-970 | F +44 (0)20 74230-971 | E [email protected] | I www.ecofys.com Company No. 4180444 Table of contents 1 Introduction 1 1.1 Policy support for biodiesel from UCO 1 1.2 UCO supply chain 2 1.3 Aim of this report 3 2 UCO biodiesel use 4 2.1 Data reported under the RTFO 4 3 UCO collection and potential 7 3.1 Estimating UCO potential 7 3.2 Literature estimates of UCO potential 8 3.2.1 UK 8 3.2.2 Ireland 10 3.2.3 EU 10 3.2.4 Outside EU 12 3.2.5 Summary 13 3.2.6 Innovative sources 14 4 Alternative uses for UCO 16 4.1 EU 16 4.1.1 Oleochemicals 17 4.1.2 Animal feed 17 4.1.3 Disposal 17 4.2 Outside EU 18 5 UCO market and traceability 19 5.1 Industry structure 19 5.1.1 UCO theft 20 5.2 Prices 20 5.2.1 Raw material prices 20 5.2.2 Supply chain prices 21 5.3 Traceability 21 6 Observations and Conclusions 23 7 Stakeholders who provided input 24 Appendix A: UCO countries of origin 25 ECOFYS UK Ltd.
    [Show full text]
  • A Guide for Coordinating a Fryer to Fuel Collection Program In
    Urban Biofuels Initiative Final Report: A Guide for Coordinating a Fryer to Fuel Collection Program in Combined Urban/Suburban Areas 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS I. Executive Summary..............................................................................................................................5 II. Introduction...........................................................................................................................................8 A. Objectives .............................................................................................................................................8 B. Participating Organizations...................................................................................................................9 Local Commercial Food Service Facilities........................................................................................9 Energy Alternative Solutions, Inc. (EASi) ........................................................................................9 Salinas Tallow Company ...................................................................................................................9 Coast Oil ..........................................................................................................................................10 City of Santa Cruz Public Works.....................................................................................................10 Ecology Action of Santa Cruz .........................................................................................................10
    [Show full text]
  • Production of Biodiesel from Brown Grease
    catalysts Article Production of Biodiesel from Brown Grease Mirit Kolet, Daniel Zerbib, Faina Nakonechny and Marina Nisnevitch * Department of Chemical Engineering, Ariel University, Kyriat-ha-Mada, Ariel 4070000, Israel; [email protected] (M.K.); [email protected] (D.Z.); [email protected] (F.N.) * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +972-391-430-42 Received: 26 August 2020; Accepted: 13 October 2020; Published: 15 October 2020 Abstract: Among the renewable energy sources is biodiesel. This fuel is usually produced by catalytic transesterification of vegetable oils and animal fats under heating and pressure. Brown grease is a mixture of oils, fats, solids and detergents from food industry wastes that is captured in grease traps. Brown grease is classified as waste and must be treated and disposed of appropriately. It contains oils and fats that can be converted into biodiesel. However, the high concentration of free fatty acids in brown grease does not enable the use of conventional biodiesel production schemes. This study proposes a new scheme for biodiesel production from brown grease. In addition, conditions for the effective separation of a fat phase from brown grease were tested, and the composition of a fatty phase was determined for several grease traps. Esterification and transesterification of brown grease lipids were carried out with methanol, where the Lewis acids BF3 and AlCl3 were used as catalysts and the reaction was activated by ultrasound. The results show that biodiesel can be obtained from brown grease by esterification and transesterification within several minutes under ultrasonic activation at room temperature. These results open prospects for the development of efficient, low-cost and environmentally friendly biodiesel production.
    [Show full text]
  • Trends in Biodiesel Production from Animal Fat Waste
    applied sciences Review Trends in Biodiesel Production from Animal Fat Waste 1, 2 2, Fidel Toldrá-Reig y , Leticia Mora and Fidel Toldrá * 1 Instituto de Tecnología Química (CSIC-UPV), Universitat Politècnica de València, Camino de Vera s/n, 46022 Valencia, Spain; [email protected] 2 Instituto de Agroquímica y Tecnología de Alimentos (CSIC), Avenue Agustín Escardino 7, 46980 Paterna, Valencia, Spain; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +34-96-3900022 Current Address: CNRS, 25 rue des Martyrs, B.P. 166, 38042 Grenoble CEDEX 9, France. y Received: 20 April 2020; Accepted: 21 May 2020; Published: 25 May 2020 Abstract: The agro-food industry generates large amounts of waste that contribute to environmental contamination. Animal fat waste constitutes some of the most relevant waste and the treatment of such waste is quite costly because environmental regulations are quite strict. Part of such costs might be reduced through the generation of bioenergy. Biodiesel constitutes a valid renewable source of energy because it is biodegradable, non-toxic and has a good combustion emission profile and can be blended up to 20% with fossil diesel for its use in many countries. Furthermore, up to 70% of the total cost of biodiesel majorly depends on the cost of the raw materials used, which can be reduced using animal fat waste because they are cheaper than vegetable oil waste. In fact, 6% of total feedstock corresponded to animal fat in 2019. Transesterification with alkaline catalysis is still preferred at industrial plants producing biodiesel. Recent developments in heterogeneous catalysts that can be easily recovered, regenerated and reused, as well as immobilized lipases with increased stability and resistance to alcohol denaturation, are promising for future industrial use.
    [Show full text]
  • RHI Evidence Report: Bioliquids for Heat
    RHI Evidence Report: Bioliquids for Heat. Assessment of the Market, Renewable Heat Potential, Cost, Performance, and Characteristics of Bioliquids for Non-Domestic Heat. th 29 October 2014 Prepared for DECC by: Eunomia Research and & Consulting Ltd. © Crown copyright 2014 URN 14D/392 You may re-use this information (not including logos) free of charge in any format or medium, under the terms of the Open Government Licence. To view this licence, visit www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/ or write to the Information Policy Team, The National Archives, Kew, London TW9 4DU, or email: [email protected]. Any enquiries regarding this publication should be sent to us at: Department of Energy and Climate Change, 3 Whitehall Place, London SW1A. 2 Assessment for inclusion of Bioliquids for Non-domestic Heat Applications under the RHI Glossary ACT: Advanced Conversion Technologies AD: Anaerobic digestion ASTM: American Society for Testing and Materials C&I: Commercial and industrial CAPEX: Capital expenditure CCC: Coordination and Consistency Contractor CfD: Contract for Difference CFPP: Cold filter plugging point CHP: Combined heat and power CV: Calorific value DD1: Deodoriser distillate DECC: Department of Energy and Climate Change DfT: Department for Transport DKK: Danish krone EC: European Commission ECA: Enhanced Capital Allowances EN14214: European standard that describes the requirements and test methods for FAME - the most common type of biodiesel EoW: End of Waste ETS: Emissions Trading Scheme EU: European
    [Show full text]
  • An Assessment of the Restaurant Grease Collection and Rendering Industry in South Carolina
    Final Report An Assessment of the Restaurant Grease Collection and Rendering Industry in South Carolina Prepared for the South Carolina Energy Office 1200 Senate Street 408 Wade Hampton Building Columbia, SC 29201 and the US Department of Energy/Southern States Energy Board Southeast Biomass State and Regional Partnership An Assessment of the Restaurant Grease Collection and Rendering Industry in South Carolina Prepared by: Travis Moore & Erika H. Myers Revised by: Tara Copeland & Erika H. Myers South Carolina Energy Office 1200 Senate Street, 408 Wade Hampton Building Columbia, SC 29201 (803) 737-8030 Prepared for: Southeastern Regional Biomass Energy Program Administered for the United States Department of Energy by the Southern States Energy Board 6325 Amherst Court Norcross, GA 30092 Under Contract No. SERBEP-SSEB2003MO-MSA-001 December 1, 2006 Revised: September 1, 2010 2 | Page DISCLAIMER NOTICE This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. The Southern States Energy Board, nor the United States Government, nor the South Carolina Energy Office, nor any agency thereof, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability of responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise, does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation or favoring by the Southern States Energy Board, or the United States Government, the South Carolina Energy Office, or any agency thereof.
    [Show full text]