Testimony of
Jason Pyle, Chief Executive Officer,
Sapphire Energy, Inc.
before the
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources
United States Senate
June 12, 2008
“Transcending Food vs. Fuel:
Moving Toward a Technology-Neutral RFS”
1
Mr. Chairman and members of the Committee, thank you very much
for inviting me to participate on this important panel, and on this critical
issue.
First, let me thank the Committee for its leadership on alternative,
renewable fuels. Your keen focus and vision have resulted in the first ever
Renewable Fuel Standard. Although there will inevitably be elements of RFS
that will improve over time, you’ve guided the country along on the right
path. Second, within the RFS debate, I want to thank this Committee for its
vision and support for technology neutrality in RFS legislation, even though
that vision did not survive final passage. As you predicted by supporting a
technology neutral position, we are now seeing the evolution of an entirely
new generation of renewable fuels. These fuels transcend the use of food as
fuel feedstock. The current dilemma that pits fuel against food is just the
first of many consequences of a technology-specific RFS. Without a
technology-neutral RFS, this nation will not meet its goals of providing 32
billion gallons of renewable fuel by 2022. Although last year’s Energy
Independence and Security Act has yet to foster such solutions, this
Committee should be applauded for anticipating an ever-expanding universe
of alternative and renewable fuels.
That’s why I am here. I’m Jason Pyle, Chief Executive Officer of
Sapphire Energy. Sapphire is one of several of this nation’s best technology
companies working to produce the next generation of renewable fuels. At
Sapphire, we focus on the production of current fuel products, such as
2
gasoline, diesel and aircraft fuel, from completely renewable sources, such as
photosynthetic microorganisms, or algae. Our mission is to produce fuels for
today’s oil and gasoline infrastructure, and two weeks ago we announced
that Sapphire had produced the first ever renewable, ASTM-compliant, 91
octane gasoline from microorganisms. Please refer to the attached two
documents for more background on Sapphire Energy.
The Problem
One of the many reasons we have cheap food is the availability of
cheap energy. We cannot expect to turn large amounts of food back into
energy in an economic manner. In today’s debate between food and fuel, we
should not have to make a choice. Both are critical to the economy, the
environment and the world at large; we should not match one against the
other. But when price and demand rise for one, both suffer. Instead of a
Pyrrhic choice between food and fuel, I offer the opportunity to transcend the
debate and produce ample supplies of both, leading this nation toward
energy independence. Instead of a dispute between two basic necessities,
we need a dialogue that supports truly sustainable alternative fuel sources.
Over the past year we have all seen prices and demand rise for
commodities such as corn, sugar and vegetable oil. The entire world now
feels the pressure. Daily we are faced with reports of people who struggle to
afford essentials. A host of factors has contributed to price increases for
3
food and fuel: weather, heightened demand, a weaker dollar, decreasing
supplies.
Just like energy, food is linked in a global market. Once we begin
fueling our cars with food crops, we witness international repercussions.
Riots occurred in Mexico earlier this year over expensive corn flour. This
price increase has been attributed to U.S. demand for corn-based ethanol
products, leaving less maize available for export. Protests over similar issues
have occurred around the world, contributing to inflation and political
instability.
Even at an increased rate of production, current domestic biofuel
processes will meet part, but not all, of U.S. demand. If the entire annual
domestic soybean crop of 3 billion bushels were converted to biodiesel at the
current efficiency of 1.4 gallons per bushel, it would provide about 6.5% of
U.S. diesel fuel production. Though certainly a valuable asset to our fuel
supply, it is clear that a spectrum of additional and diverse biofuels sources
will be necessary to fulfill demand.
Congress first adopted the Renewable Fuels Standard in 2005, but
wisely recognized that neither biodiesel nor ethanol would be the final
solution. It created the program as a bridge to a new generation of fuels,
and established a system of incentives to create a marketplace for new
technologies. Congress should consider whether the incentives are neutral
and fair. Ask whether these mechanisms will lead to the support and
development of fuels that will give America true energy independence.
4
Congress should ensure that the next round of incentives can be applied to
advanced technologies such as Sapphire’s. American innovation is the heart
of our people and our economy; I urge you to support this with additional
legislation that promotes a technology-neutral RFS.
The Solution
Food for fuel concerns are real, but can be managed. Industries such
as ethanol from corn and biodiesel from vegetable oil can continue to play an
important role in the energy mix. However, if we intend to practically and
economically reach the goals of the RFS, we must be ready to rapidly
embrace new fuel technologies. We must call on American ingenuity and
entrepreneurialism for the solutions.
When Congress passed the Energy Policy Act of 2005, it put the
country on a path toward an energy future independent of imported
resources. As Americans, we must support this vision. We should strive to
maximize production, create fuel-efficient cars, reduce the amount of driving
we do and, finally, develop alternatives to fossil fuels. All these efforts
deserve increased support. But without a truly new source of fuel, the
system will remain in turmoil, prices will soar and the conflict between food
and fuel will persist.
Senators, my colleagues and I at Sapphire Energy have been thinking
about this for a long time. We knew that an energy source based on
agriculture would serve this country best as a stepping stone to a green
5
energy future. We knew that energy requiring vast amounts of fresh water
resources was not a viable option. And, finally, if we wanted to make a
difference quickly, we knew we needed a fuel that could be transported and
refined just like petroleum. Two years ago we asked ourselves, “In a perfect
world, how should the next generation of fuel be produced and distributed?”
These were our founding principles:
1. Fuel production must not use farmland. Period.
2. Fuel production must be carbon neutral.
3. Fuel production and delivery must use the existing petroleum
infrastructure.
4. Fuel production must scale domestically to reach tens of billions
of gallons per year.
5. The next generation of fuels must be compatible with today’s
vehicles.
That sounded like a tall order. But Americans have dreamed big and
delivered in the past – atomic energy, highways and railroads that crisscross
our nation, a man on the moon, mapping the human genome. Now, a similar
ingenuity has developed a completely renewable and homegrown source of
gasoline. I offer that we do not have to sacrifice food production for fuel
production. We do not have to choose between powering our industries and
feeding the hungry.
The Sapphire processes and technologies are so revolutionary that the
company is at the forefront of an entirely new industrial category called
6
“Green Crude Production”. Products and processes in this category differ
significantly from other biofuels because they are made solely from
photosynthetic microorganisms, sunlight and CO2; do not result in biodiesel
or ethanol; enhance and replace petroleum-based products; are carbon
neutral and renewable; and don’t require any food crop or agricultural land.
The Sapphire process produces a replica of light sweet crude, green crude
that can be used in traditional refining to make real gasoline, diesel, and
aircraft fuel. Our feedstocks produce 10 to 100 times more energy per acre
than cropland biofuels. A side benefit of our process is that the
microorganisms consume pollutants and convert them to fuel. Using the
Sapphire process, we have dramatically altered the domestic energy and
petrochemical landscape and avoided the food versus fuel debate.
Please allow me to reiterate, the Sapphire process does not create
ethanol; it does not produce biodiesel; it does not use crops or valuable
farmland. Sapphire fuel is the fuel we use today, the kind that is in your car
or truck or airplane right now. It’s gasoline, diesel and aircraft fuel.
Senators, this is a solution. This is a truly renewable, truly sustainable,
alternative fuel— “Sapphire’s green crude oil”.
This fuel, Sapphire fuel, is the world’s first truly renewable
petrochemical product, produced by converting sunlight and CO2 into a
renewable, carbon-neutral alternative to conventional fossil fuels, without
the drawbacks of current biofuels.
7
This fuel is compatible with the current energy infrastructure—cars,
refineries, and pipelines.
Sapphire’s scalable production facilities will produce this fuel
economically because production will be modular, transportable, fueled by
sunlight, and not constrained by arable land, crops, or other natural
resources. Sapphire has turned sunlight into gasoline.
The Government’s Role
Governments often offer subsidies in areas in which they hope to
create incentives for certain economic behaviors. Naturally, governments
must act as arbiters to separate those who qualify from those who do not
qualify for the subsidies. Unfortunately, sometimes those separations create
an artificial division that prevents the subsidies from achieving their goal.
The nation has asked for energy independence and cleaner fuel products.
Thankfully, our lawmakers have responded and given us a Renewable Fuel
Standard. Unfortunately, the artificial division of technology within that
standard is hindering the most promising fuel technologies from developing
alongside existing renewable industries. The nation asked for energy
independence and cleaner fuel products, not a specific subsidy for a specific
fuel process. If we want to have 32 billion gallons of renewable fuel in 2022,
we are going to need every source of technology and development possible
to deliver it. Please take the handcuffs off of innovation and allow all forms
of renewable technology to participate in the Renewable Fuel Standard.
8
We at Sapphire are fortunate in that we receive financial support from
top venture capital firms such as ARCH Venture Partners and Venrock, and
from one of the world’s largest and most visionary foundations, the Wellcome
Trust. Not all emerging producers of green crude or renewable gasoline,
however, will be so fortunate. By continuing to subsidize mostly the existing
technologies instead of emerging alternatives, the government runs the risk
of discouraging a real future of renewable energy.
I support technology neutrality when it comes to subsidies for
renewable fuels. In other words, none of the technologies and products that
would help achieve the RFS should receive favorable treatment—not
biodiesel, not cellulosic ethanol, and not fuels from algae. A growing
competitive market should separate winners from losers. A subsidy system
should support a constantly changing landscape of fuel and fuel technology.
I recommend a technology-neutral platform that supports criteria rather than
specific feedstocks, fuels or fuel processes. I am offering a future that relies
on non-arable, non-agricultural land; a future based on domestic fuel
production and a supply of fuel we use today within 5 years time. I believe
this will be an essential part of the renewable fuel landscape and I urge you
to assist me and other innovative companies with technology-neutral
legislation.
Conclusion
9
The unfortunate phrase “food vs. fuel” suggests a conflict, a dilemma.
We have faced this dilemma because there have been virtually no viable
alternatives to existing sources of fossil fuel. Until now. At Sapphire Energy,
we can change all that. This is the fuel that can address the food versus fuel
dilemma by enabling ample production of both.
Thank you again, Mr. Chairman, for the opportunity to appear before
you. I will gladly take questions from you and the Committee at the
appropriate time.
10