Industrial alcohol plant of Standard Oil of N e w Jersey at Baton Rouge, La. Alcohol still tower of Commercial Solvents Corp., Terre Haute, Ind.
Ethyl alcohol plant of Shell Chemi cal Corp. near Houston, Tex.
INDUSTRIAL ALCOHOL
Α Ε STAFF R E P O R T
T N A world harassed b y unrelenting short•*- ages, industrial alcohol is a refreshing: anomaly. Despite present TJ. S. scarcities of virtually every othex big-tonnage chemi cal—sulfur, chlorine, ammonia, benzene, and scores of others—spokesmen for the industrial alcohol industry today are con fidently saying that they can produce all t h e ethyl alcohol required ~by t h e chemical industry, and more besides- They are certain, that t h e nation's 1951 industrial alcohol demands of approximately 3 6 5 million, gallons (^vine gallons o f 1 9 0 proof) will readily he met. Industry m e n further assert that, should all-out war come, the U - S. -will still "be admirably equipped t o meet its full industrial alcohol needs. Of course, total w a r might very w e l l demand
4932
With industrial alcohol supplies at a postwar high a n d going higher, ethyl alcohol t o d a y is one of the brighter aspects of the total national economy
the near-complete conversion of the "bever age alcohol industry to the production of industrial alcohol—but not even that possi bility is giving today's vastly overstocked beverage manufacturers very much cause for alarm. What can possibly account for such optimism on the part of the U. S. alcohol industry? Among t h e major reasons are the current record-breaking production of synthetic alcohol and the greatly steppedup use of grain in industrial alcohol plants. Moreover, the government synthetic rub ber program, which less than a year ago was ominously viewed as a major threat to the nation's alcohol supply, is actually consuming alcohol a t only about o n e third the peak rate of World War II; what alco
CHEMICAL
hol is being used is largely being shipped in from abroad. Clear-cut evidence of the absence of an industrial alcohol shortage today may be found in the record of the nation's alcohol stocks. A l o w point was reached a year ago w h e n stocks totaled a mere 12 million gallons. Ever since, reserves have risen markedly, until, b y the end of June 1951, stocks had climbed to 53 milhon gallons of domestic alcohol—in addition to 10 million gallons from abroad. In contrast, the nation's industrial alcohol stocks dur ing the years 1 9 4 7 through 1949 av eraged between 1 5 and 20 million gallons, with a peak of less than 3 0 million. At present, the fermentation alcohol in dustry is running well below capacity.
AND
ENGINEERING
NEWS
Even though fermentation plants are capable of turning out approximately 400 million gallons of industrial alcohol a year, their actual output in fiscal year 1951 (the 12-month period ending June 30, 1951) was less than 120 million. On the other hand, synthetic alcohol plants, currently enjoying their biggest bonanza in history, are operating at practically capacity levels —and diiore giant new installations are already on the way. From Cosmetics to Guided Missiles Although alcohol has been employed in the preparation of medicines, perfumes, and cosmetics for centuries, it has only been within the past 100 years that alcohol has found considerable use as anything other than a beverage. And only within approximately the past 40 years has it served as a vital raw material in the world's chemical industry. Each year, alcohol by the millions of gallons goes into the making of acetaldehyde, acetic acid, ethyl acetate, ethyl chloride, and ethyl ether. Perhaps the most spectacular advance in the use of alcohol has taken place in the manufacture of aldehydes (mainly acetaldehyde), which accounted for a full 87.2 million gallons of alcohol in fiscal year 1950, as contrasted with 16.7 million gallons in fiscal year 1936. As a solvent of widespread application, alcohol is second only to water. Particularly in wartime, this versatile reagent is used in the production of explosives ( notably smokeless powder), chemical warfare gases, antifreeze, and butadiene for synthetic rubber. In the manufacture of drugs, plastics, lacquers, polishes, plasticizers, and rubber accelerators, alcohol is a key raw material. One manufacturer, Union Carbide and Carbon, produces no less than 57 different chemical products from ethyl alcohol. In Europe and elsewhere, alcohol has long served as an essential fuel, but, apart from its use in rockets, guided missiles, and souped-up racing cars, has never made much of a splash in this country. In 1918, a blend containing 10% anhydrous alcohol and 90% gasoline, called Alcogas, was turned loose on the motor fuel market by U. S. Industrial Alcohol Co. The product had a lightning career of two years and then abruptly faded out of the picture. Actually, alcohol can be used as a motor fuel with considerable success—either in an alcohol-gasoline blend containing 10 to 25% alcohol or by direct injection of an alcohol-water mixture into the engine manifold. The big factor, of course, is cost. In the injection system, which calls for two fuel tanks and two carburetors, the alcohol, which is more expensive than gasoline, is used only when needed—that is, when the car is accelerating, climbing •hills, or, in general, operating near full throttle. The chief advantage of alcohol, whether methyl or ethyl, is its outstanding ability to reduce knocking. In years past, U. S. farmers and others have vigorously pushed the use of ethyl alcohol as an auxiliary motor fuel—prinV O L U M E
2 9,
NO.
47
cipally because this additional outlet for with which such alcohols may be moved alcohol, if developed, would have pro- about has made them particularly appealvided a ready market for prevailing farm ing to the U. S. chemical industry. This surpluses. In recent years, however, such is one of the reasons—apart from price conpromotional efforts have died out. Chief . siderations—why methyl and isopropyl alreason has been the rapid drop-off in U. S. cohols are winning increasing favor in the farm surpluses—^a decline brought on by general solvent field. both the nation's vastly accelerated conFor some time now, methanol and ethylsumption of grain and its sizable ship- ene glycol have been pushing ethyl alcoments of grain to distressed countries hol into the background in antifreeze apabroad. Factors such as these, plus the plications. Specifically, the annual U. S. high cost of ethyl alcohol, have continued consumption of ethyl alcohol as an antito militate against the use of ethyl alcohol freeze has fallen off from about 40 million in U. S. motor fuels. gallons in 1935 to about 1 million gallons On the other hand, the prospects for tod,ay—-despite the tremendous increase in methyl alcohol are considerably more the number of U. S. motor vehicles. promising. For example, Thompson ProdIn recent years, new and ingenious ways ucts, Inc., specifies a fluid containing 85% have been found to synthesize various ormethanol and 15% water, plus 3 ml. of ganic chemicals without .the use of ethyl tetraethyllead per gallon, for use in its alcohol. As a case in point, the Celanese alcohol injection devices called Vitameters. Corp. produces acetaldehyde at Bishop, These units are marketed through Cadillac Tex., by the direct air oxidation of butane distributors and are specified by Crosley and propane. The Fischer-Tropsch procMotors as standard equipment with their ess may one day become another leading 10:1 compression ratio Quicksilver en- source of acetaldehyde. In the years gine. Obviously, methyl rather than ethyl ahead, the up-and-coming oxo process may alcohol is employed in these metering further shrink the total demand foe ethyl devices because of methanors very much alcohol. lower, very much more stable price. Alcohol from Many Sources Lost Markets Prior to about 1929, the fermentation Today, more and more compounds are of sugars and starches was responsible for invading markets formerly dominated by virtually the entire commercial output oi ethyl alcohol. In particular, ethyl alcohol U. S. ethyl alcohol. Gradually, however, is losing ground to methyl and isopropyl the manufacture of synthetic alcohol from alcohols, which may not only be cheaper ethylene began to account foc a steadily but more effective working materials. increasing share of the nation's alcohol Moreover, these other alcohols, because production. For example, out of the 95.1 they are not potentially usable as bev- million gallons of ethyl alcohol produced erages, are not controlled by a welter of by U. S. industrial alcohol plants in fiscal government regulations. The relative ease year 1935, 85.5% was derived from
U. S. Production and Prices of Denatured Ethyl Alcohol" FISCAL YEAR ENDING JUNE 30 PRODUCTION, MILLIONS OF WINE GALLONS
PRICE*, CENTS PER GALLON
"Represents both specially a n d completely denatured a l c o h o l f r o m domestic a n d imported ethyl a l c o h o l . k
produced
Price for tankcar lots o f specially denatured alcohol ( S D 1 , 1 9 0 proof) at e n d of fiscal period. W a r t i m e prices are based upon a l c o h o l produced f r o m molasses.
^ N O V E M B E R
Source; U. S. Bureau o f Internal R e v e n u e , Alcohol T o * Unit, and U . S. Bureau o f Labor Statiilici.
19,
1951
4933
from yeast c a n speedily go to work produce ethyl alcohol.
O p e r a t o r runs field test in alcohol plant at S t a n d a r d Oil of New Jersey's Baton R o u g e refinery
molasses, 9.79c from ethylene, 2.8*% from grain, and 2.0*70 from all other materials. On t h e other h a n d , in fiscal year 1 9 5 1 , out of a total industrial alcohol production of 234.2 million gallons, approximately 23.9% was o b t a i n e d from molasses, 48.5% from ethylene, 2 5 . 7 % from grain, a n d 1.9% from .all o t h e r materials. Certainly, the most significant development during the intervening years was t h e vast expansion in the p r o d u c t i o n of alcohol from ethylene —from 9.3 million gallons of alcohol in fiscal y e a r 1935 to 113.5 million gallons in fiscal year 1951. In the case of grains, the high p e r c e n t a g e of 2 5 . 7 % for fiscal year 1951 w a s strictly a passing phenomenon, b r o u g h t on by t h e b o o m i n g industrial mobilization p r o g r a m . Surely in the months a h e a d , as n e w a n d enlarged synthetic alcohol plants a r e b r o u g h t into operation, t h e m a n u f a c t u r e of high-cost alcohol from grain will,promptly and drastically decline. F o r e x a m p l e , in fiscal year 1950, grain a c c o u n t e d for a very modest 0.89fc of the n a t i o n ' s total industrial alcohol production. T h e many a n d varied r a w materials used in t h e m a n u f a c t u r e of alcohol may b e conveniently classified u n d e r four major h e a d i n g s : sugars, starches, cellulosic m a t e rials, and hydrocarbon gases. I n all but t h e h y d r o c a r b o n category, the production of alcohol, at o n e point or another, involves t h e fermentation of sugars. Sugars (from sugar cane, s u g a r beets ) may be converted to alcohol directly. Starches (from grains, p o t a t o e s ) must first be hydrolyzed to ferm e n t a b l e sugars by the action of enzymes from rnalt or molds. Cellulose (from w o o d , agricultural r e s i d u e s ) must likewise b e c o n v e r t e d to sugars—in this case, b y the a c t i o n of mineral acids. Once t h e desired f e r m e n t a b l e sugars are formed, enzymes
4934
to
Sugars The p r i n c i p a l source of sugars used in t h e U. S. p r o d u c t i o n of alcohol is blackstrap molasses, obtained mainly from C u b a . Blackstrap (a term that worked its w a y into the English l a n g u a g e via Java a n d i h e Dutch w o r d stroop, m e a n i n g sirup) is collected as a by-product of cane sugar manufacture. The traditional popularity of molasses has stemmed primarily from its low price, ready availability, and easy convertibility t o alcohol. Duiiiig r e c e n t years, there has b e e n steadily increasing competition b e t w e e n t h e alternative uses of molasses in t h e manufacture of alcohol a n d in the p r e p a r a tion oi livestock feeds. Molasses, because of its nonrtally low price and high carbohydrate value, is a n extremely attractive feed supplement, w h i c h is usually a d d e d to feeds to t h e extent of about 10%. Between fiscal years 1943 a n d 1950, t h e annual -use of molasses in U. S. livestock feeds increased from 64.4 million to 266.8 million gallons. D u r i n g the same period, t h e consumption of molasses in U. S. industrial alcohol plants d r o p p e d from 171.4 million to 1 2 9 . 1 million gallons. Although t h e m a n u f a c t u r e of alcohol from t h e sugar-containing waste products of the fruit industry might a p p e a r to be a highly d e s i r a b l e operation—particularly as a means of reducing stream pollution in t h e vicinity of canning plants—such p r o duction is relatively costly. Often these waste p r o d u c t s contain as m u c h as 979r water, t h e b u l k of w h i c h m u s t be removed. At present, t h e cost of manufacturing alcohol from s u c h wastes cannot begin to compete with operations based on most other r a w materials. As a result, citrus wastes, for example, generally account for less than 0 . 5 % of t h e nation's total industrial alcohol production, while pineapple juice, a p p l e pectin residue, and other products are the sources of even lesser percentages of U. S. alcohol. Starches Because t h e foremost starchy materials u s e d in the manufacture of alcohol—corn, grain s o r g h u m , wheat, rye, barley, a n d potatoes—ordinarily command much higher prices a s foodstuffs, their use in industrial alcohol plants during normal times is q u i t e limited. Not only is grain a comparatively costly r a w material b u t it must first b e converted to sugar before alcohol p r o d u c t i o n can even get started. As a rule, grain is a significant factor in the production of industrial alcohol only when emergency conditions create extraordinary d e m a n d s for alcohol. Among t h e major drawbacks in the use of grain are its wild fluctuations in price. F o r example, corn prices h a v e varied all t h e way f r o m 15 cents to $2.45 a bushel within the p a s t t w o decades. Although t h e price of molasses is certainly far from static, its p r i c e swings are to some extent d a m p e d b y the continuing demand for molasses o n t h e p a r t of the alcohol indus-
CHEMICAL
try. At least there is some relationship between the price of molasses a n d t h e d e m a n d for alcohol—a state of affairs which does not hold true for grain. Repeatedly, efforts h a v e b e e n m a d e to bring down t h e cost of producing alcohol from grain. I n particular, the U . S. Department of Agriculture has thoroughly explored t h e potentialities of n e w agents for the saccharification of grain mashes. F o r example, g o v e r n m e n t scientists have found that about 3.6 cents per gallon can be saved when t h e m a l t normally used in the manufacture of alcohol from grain is replaced by fungal amylase. T h u s far, however, only one commercial alcohol p l a n t Grain Processing C o r p / s installation at Muscatine, Iowa—has m a d e at least the partial change-over from malt to fungal amylase. Major reasons for t h e slow acceptance of t h e amylase process: the expenditures necessary for extra plant equipment and t h e industry's general reluctance to switch from a familiar, time-honored technique to one t h a t is relatively n e w a n d untried. Besides, in the case of beverage alcohol, malt imparts to t h e p r o d u c t a distinctly superior taste and aroma—qualities that are ordinarily of no importance in the case of industrial alcohol. Shortly after World W a r II, surplus potatoes began to figure prominently in the manufacture of industrial alcohol not only because of the scarcity of o t h e r farm crops b u t because the Department of Agriculture was able t o deliver potatoes to fermentation . plants at extremely low prices. In fiscal year 1947, for example, industrial alcohol plants processed some 566 million p o u n d s of potatoes w h i c h , in turn, accounted for approximately 5 % of the nation's alcohol production. By fiscal year 1950, however, the consumption of potatoes in industrial alcohol plants h a d slumped to 7.2 million pounds, equivalent to 0.02Ç^ of the nation's alcohol output. By fiscal year 1951, potatoes h a d vanished from U. S. alcohol plants. T h e low yield of alcohol obtainable from a unit weight of potatoes (a single gallon of alcohol requires about 100 p o u n d s of potatoes) and thus t h e high transportation costs chargeable to a gallon of alcohol (at least 60 cents t o haul 100 p o u n d s of potatoes from Maine to Philadelphia) make this r a w material far from economical. In fact, even when potatoes sell at the dirt-cheap price of one cent p e r h u n dredweight ( s u p p o r t price: about $2.50 per h u n d r e d w e i g h t ) , the cost of alcohol from potatoes is still ordinarily prohibitive. Actually, potatoes a r e a m o n g the costliest raw materials available for t h e production of ethyl alcohol—a fact t h a t m a n y an overzealous Congressman utterly ignored last year in t h e vigorous debate over surplus potatoes. Cellulosic Materials Although such eellulosic materials as corn cobs, cottonseed hulls, p e a n u t shells, a n d sugar c a n e bagasse have all, at o n e t i m e or another, been proposed as potential sources of alcohol, only wood p u l p a n d
AND
ENGINEERING
NEWS
ETHYL ALCOHOL PRODUCED FROM ETHYLENE, MOLASSES, AND GRAIN IN U. S. INDUSTRIAL ALCOHOL PLANTS FISCAL YEAR ENDING JUNE 30
Source : U. S. Bureau of Internal Revenue, Alcohol Tax Unit.
wood wastes have ever gained even minor status. In t h e sulfite process for the manufacture of paper p u l p , sugars are formed by t h e hydrolysis of wood constituents that are dissolved out to p r o d u c e usable fibers. Approximately 65% of these sugars ( equivalent to about 1 to 2 % of the sulfite waste liquor) is capable of being ferm e n t e d to alcohol. I n June 1943, t h e Ontario Paper Co. started producing alcohol from sulfite liquor at Thorold, Ontario. Later, another plant was set u p by Commercial Alcohols, Ltd., at Gatineau, Quebec. I n 1945, t h e sulfite plant of the P u g e t Sound Pulp a n d Timber Co., built by t h e U. S. Government, began turning out alcohol at Bellingham, W a s b . In fiscal year 1951, approximately 2.9 million gallons of alcohol ( e q u a l to about 1% of total U . S . ^production) was derived from t h e waste liquors of t h e Bellingham plant —the onlv installation of its kind in the U . S. D u r i n g World W a r I, two American plants—one at Fullerton, La., a n d another at Georgetown, S. C—manufactured alcohol from sawdust. Because of low yields (approximately 22 gallons of 1 0 0 % alcohol p e r ton of dry southern p i n e ) , the existing process could not begin to comp e t e with operations based on molasses. As a result, both plants folded two years after t h e war. Later, German scientists, V O L U M E
2 9,
NO.
spurred by the growing d e m a n d for alcohol as a motor fuel, were able to obtain approximately t h r e e times t h e earlier yields. Thanks to continuing research, over 20 foreign plants were successfully producing ethvl alcohol from w o o d wastes b y 1941. During World W a r II, the U. S. Government, at a cost of about $3.1 million, built an alcohol-from-wood-waste plant for the Willamette Valley Chemical Co. at Springfield, Ore. Employing a modification of t h e Scholler process, originally developed in Germany^ this 4-million-gallon-a-year installation was a commercial scale-up of a pilot plant built early in World W a r II by the Department of Agriculture's Forest Products Laboratory at Madison, Wis. Although intended for wartime emergency use, the Springfield plant actually was not completed until after t h e war was over. In the s u m m e r of 1947, it was put through a trial run and then shut down. In July 1949, t h e government-owned plant was leased to the Oregon W o o d Chemical Co., which, after an extended shutdown, expects to resume operations in t h e near future. Hydrocarbon Gases Virtually the entire U. S. output of synthetic alcohol is derived from the direct or indirect hydration of ethylene,
47 . N O V E M B E R
19,
1951
which is obtained from natural and coke oven g a s e s , from t h e waste gases of the petroleum industry, and from t h e pyrolysis of ethane, propane, a n d butane. The older and by far tHe more widely used synthesis involves t h e indirect hydration of e t h y l e n e . First, ethylene is allowed to react with concentrated sulfuric acid to form e t h y l hydrogen sulfate a n d diethyl sulfate, b o t h of which a r e then t r e a t e d with w a t e r to yield -ethyl alcohol a n d sulfuric acid. This roundabout technique was developed as a means of getting around the slow reaction rates originally attainahle b y direct hydration. W i t h i n t h e past three years, however, the production of alcohol b y direct h y d r a tion h a s come into i t s own. T h e process has t h e compelling advantages of requiring n o sulfuric a c i d (a decidedly scarce item) and a minimum of costly corrosionresistant equipment. The optimum conversion of ethylene to alcohol by direct hydration i s achieved by t h e u s e of high pressures, l o w temperatures, suitable catalysts (aluminum oxide and o t h e r s ) , and by t h e recycling of t h e reactant gases. Synthetic Alcohol Production T h e first commercial U. S . production of synthetic alcohol w a s launched by Carbide a n d Carbon Chemicals at South Charleston, W. Va., i n about 1929. E t h y l ene o b t a i n e d from natural gas was indirectly hydrated t o alcohol. In 1933, Carbide b u i l t a second plant a t \Vhiting, Ind., employing waste gases obtained from the adjoining Standard Oil refiner)'. Carbide's third plant, -which, like the first, was b a s e d on c r a c k e d natural gas, was brought into operation at Texas City, Tex., in 1940. I n 1943, Standard O i l of New Jersey began producing alcohol from petroleum refinery g a s e s at Baton R o u g e , La. Then in 1948, a t D e e r Park, Tex., Shell Chemi-cal, using cracked n a t u r a l gas, became t h e first U. S. manufacturer t o produce synthetic alcohol commercially by the direct hydration o f ethylene. Shell has since licensed its process t o t h e British, who completed t h e construction of their direct-hydration e t h y l alcohol plant early this ye>ar. In fiscal year 1 9 5 1 approximately 16.5 million gallons of alcohol ( 7 . 0 % of total U.S. industrial alcohol production) was obtained b y the d i r e c t hydration of ethylene. I n t h e same fiscal p e r i o d , approximately 97.0 million gallons of alcohol (41.59^ of the nation's total) was synthesized from ethylene indirectly. I n the coming years, the production of synthetic alcohol by these a n d other processes is certain to increase markedly, n o t only because of t h e growing availability of ethylene b u t because, w h e n molasses prices are high, alcohol c a n be produced more cheaply from ethylene than from any other raw m a t e r i a l . Although the Fischer-Tropsch process, based on carbon monoxide and hydrogen derived from coal o r natural gas, is generally t h o u g h t of in terms of liquid fuels synthesis only, this process may also serve as an important s o u r c e of ethyl alcohol. In 4935
i act, e t h y l alcohol is the principal oxygenate-d by-product of the Fischer-Tropsch process., which also yields other alcohols, gasoline, Diesel oil, aldehydes, acids, and ketones. T h r e e years ago, Carthage Hydrocol began building a full-scale synthetic liquid fuels p>lant based on the fundamental Fischer-Tropsch process a t Brownsville, Tex. Employing natural gas as its major raw material, the plant—largest of its kind in the world—was designed to produce approximately 6500 barrels of gasoline a day. However, hampered b y a succession of meelianical difficulties, brought on, in part, "by the high-temperature failure of structural materials, t h e Carthage H y d r o col p l a n t has n e v e r operated at more than about Î 5 r ^ of its rated capacity, and then only briefly. Although shut down at present for t h e repair of its gas generators, t h e plant i s expected to b e in full operation by next spring. T h e ethyl alcohol produced by Carthage Hydrocol is sold to Stanolind Oil anc3 Gas a s a water solution containing a variety of oxygenated hydrocarbons. Stanolimd separates and refines these m a t e rials a t its neighboring Brownsville plant, and t h o products are sold to U. S. I n d u s trial Cliemicals for marketing and possibly further processing. Bureau of M i n e s researchers at Bruceton, P a . , are currently exploring t h e production of ethyl alcohol via the oxo process. T h e synthesis involves the reaction of methanol -with carbon monoxide and hydrogen at 180° to 185° C. and 3000 pounds per s q u a r e inch pressure in t h e presence of a cobalt catalyst. Between •30 a n d 40c/( of t h e reacting methanol ends up as ethyl alcohol, the remaining m a t e rial consisting largely of diethyl ether and dirnetliyl acetal. Wartime Boom In the vears immediately preceding World War I I , t h e U . S. turned o u t a p proximately 1O0 million gallons of industrial alcohol annually. T h e n came t h e tremendous upsurge of World W a r I I . Tiider* the prime knpetus of the government synthetic rubber program, alcohol demand zoomed. Obviously, the nation's unprecedented needs could not be met b y industrial alcohol plants alone. On Feb. 20, 1942, t h e Government ordered all b e v e r a g e manufacturers c a p able of producing 190-proof alcohol t o switcR immediately to the production of industrial-grade material. On Oct. 8, 1942, all ocTier producers of high-proof spirits, under* strict government orders, began channeling t h e i r entire outputs to redistillation plants for conversion to industrial alcohol. As alcohol requirements m o u n t e d , many an ancient winery and brewery was called into service. At the same time, t h e Government, at a cost of $14 million, built three alcohol plants of its own—at Kansas City, Mo.; O m a h a , N e b . ; and Muscatine, Iowa» In addition to these alcohol-fromgrain plants, having a combined capacity of S T . 5 million gallons of alcohol a year, the Oovernment built its sulfite liquor
4936
plant at Bellingham, Wash., and its w o o d waste plant at Springfield, Ore. As a result of a vast nationwide program, U. S. annual production of industrial alcohol during World W a r II increased over fivefold—reaching a staggering total of 539.7 million gallons during fiscal year 1945. Actually, most of this phenomenal rise was brought about not by the increase —however great—in the nation's total alcohol capacity, but rather by t h e conversion of existing beverage alcohol facilities to the manufacture of industrial alcohol. Because of the continuing harassment of submarine warfare and thus the difficulty of obtaining molasses from t h e Caribbean—plus the very fact that most of the nation's beverage alcohol plants w e r e e q u i p p e d to handle grains only—a substantial amount of alcohol produced during t h e war years was derived from grain. In fact, between fiscal years 1940 and 1945, t h e percentage of U. S. alcohol produced from grain in industrial alcohol plants increased from 5.7 to 4 3 . 3 % . During the same period, the percentage of alcohol obtained from mol sses dropped from 68.6 to 29.3%, although the actual amount of molasses used changed only slightly. Clearly, high-cost grain had replaced lowcost molasses as the principal r a w m a t e rial in industrial alcohol plants. Although the w a r t i m e output of synthetic alcohol was upped considerably ( from 32.2 million to 58.8 million gallons b e t w e e n fiscal years 1940 a n d 1 9 4 5 ) , this increase was not nearly as impressive as might have been expected. T h e major reasons w e r e the wartime scarcities of vital construction materials and the fact that, during World W a r II, a n alcohol plant based on grain could b e built m u c h more rapidly and at about one third the cost of an alcohol plant having equal capacity b u t geared to ethylene.
During 1944, the Government allocated approximately 5 5 % of t h e nation's industrial alcohol for t h e m a n u f a c t u r e of synthetic rubber, 2 6 % for civilian a n d indirect military needs, 9 % for lend-lease, 5 % for direct military uses, a n d 5 % for antifreeze. T h e big taker was obviously synthetic rubber. T h e synthetic r u b b e r program alone during peak year 1945 consumed fully three times t h e a m o u n t of alcohol used for all industrial purposes in the United States in 1939. Of course, w h a t t h e r u b b e r xerogram really n e e d e d was b u t a d i e n e . Because the production of b u t a d i e n e from alcohol is much more costly t h a n production b a s e d on butane or butylène obtained from petroleum, g o v e r n m e n t planners originally expected t h a t only about 3 5 % of the b u t a diene required for t h e GR-S p r o g r a m would be synthesized from alcohol. I n fact, only three of the nation's 16 w a r t i m e butadiene plants w e r e designed to o p e r ate on alcohol. However, in t h e initial stages of W o r l d W a r I I , alcohol-butadiene plants w e r e forced to carry most of the load, not only because of t h e lengthy delays encountered in the construction of p e t r o l e u m - b u t a diene facilities b u t because of the tremendous d e m a n d for b u t a n e and b u t y l è n e on the part of t h e aviation gasoline program. In t h e white heat of t h e w a r t i m e emergency, alcohol-butadiene plants in August 1944 were running at no less than 188% of rated capacity, t u r n i n g out 8 2 % of the nation's b u t a d i e n e . However, in the months that followed, decreasing percentages of U. S. b u t a d i e n e were d e r i v e d from alcohol. Prior to World W a r I I , U.S. i m p o r t s of nonbeverage alcohol were negligible and ordinarily were exceeded by exports. Once the w a r started, however, the U n i t e d States began importing alcohol in earnest—
USES OF SPECIALLY DENATURED ALCOHOL FISCAL YEAR ENDING JUNE 3 0
1950
SOLVENT ALDEHYDES ACETIC ACID
|
VINEGAR
|
ETHYL ACETATE
•
ETHYL CHLORIDE
|
SYNTHETIC RUBBER I OTHER CHEMICALS
•
MISCELLANEOUS USES | 0
25 50 MILLIONS O F W I N E
75 1O0 GALLONS
Source: U. S. Bureau of Internal Revenue, Alcohol Tax Unit.
CHEMICAL
AND
ENGINEERING
NEWS
launched its giant industrial mobilization program. Demand for alcohol soared. The chemical industry promptly tied up virtually the entire domestic output of industrial alcohol—with synthetic alcohol selling for about 25 to 30 cents a gallon and molasses alcohol for roughly 50 cents a gallon. Branches of the chemical industry unable to meet their minimum alcohol requirements from either synthetic or molasses sources were faced with three basic alternatives: They could import alcohol from such countries as France, Finland, Mexico, and Cuba; they could buy alcohol from grain at about $1.00 a gallon; or they could struggle along with less. As the mobilization program gained momentum, imports began streaming into the country. During fiscal year 1951, a full 105 million gallons of alcohol entered the U. S. from abroad. Simultaneously, the consumption of grain in U. S. industrial alcohol plants skyrocketed—from 27.6 million pounds of grain in fiscal year 1950 to 1.3 billion pounds in fiscal year 1951. Mainly because of the alcohol industry's tremendously increased use of corn, barley, and grain sorghum, the total production of industrial alcohol in the United States rose from 165 million gallons in fiscal year 1950 to 234.2 million gallons in fiscal year 1951—an increase of over 40%.
Cooking, yeasting, and fermenting equipment at alcohol pilot plant of Northern Regional Research Laboratory, Peoria, 111. mainly from Cuba, Canada, and Mexico. In 1944, for example, imports totaled 30-2 million gallons. In that same year, however, the United States, under lend-lease agreements, shipped a full 55 million gallons of alcohol to the Soviet Union, or close to 95% of total U. S. alcohol exports. In the following year, the Russians received 26 million gallons of alcohol, or over 95% of U. S. exports. By 1946, however, the Russians' share had fallen to less than 1%, with the bulk of U. S. alcohol exports going to the United Kingdom. Postwar Shakedown When the war ended in 1945, the industrial demand for alcohol dropped off sharply. Synthetic rubber plants, in particular, drastically cut their production schedules. For example, in fiscal year 1947, synthetic rubber plants required merely 9.3 million gallons of denatured alcohol—in contrast to the 315.9 million gallons consumed in fiscal year 1945. By fiscal year 1947, the total production of U. S. denatured alcohol had dropped to 183.7 million gallons. , In the months immediately following World War II, the alcohol industry went through a series of thoroughgoing shakedowns. Grain shortages and high prices forced many an alcohol plant to abandon VOLUME
2 9, N O .
47»
its use of "wheat and corn. As the U. S. stepped urp its food shipments to Europe, the production of alcohol from grain further declined. In October 1948, industrial alcohol was bringing in about 75 cents a gallon in tankcar lots. Molasses, at the same time, was selling for about 21 cents a gallon. Then the bottoin. fell out. Publicker Industries, one of the nation's top alcohol producers, entered into an agreement with the Cuban government to buy molasses at a price directly keyed to the price of the alcohol it sold. Th-ereupon, Publicker began slashing its prices. At just about the same time, Shell Chemical entered the market as a major supplier of synthetic alcohol. Within a matter- of months, the price of alcohol had plummeted to 17 cents a gallon, with molasses simultaneously selling for about 4 cents a gallon. As a consequence of a feverish, year-long price war, many an industrial alcohol producer, forced to sell below cosL· took a fierce financial beating. By June L949, the price of alcohol had gradually worked its way up to 21 cents a gallon, increasing slowly to 37 cents a gallon by J u n e 1950. In the early months of 1950, the alcohol industry rexnainecl reasonably stable, with demand adequately balanced by supply. Then as war flared up in Korea, the U. S.
NOVEMBER
"19,
1951
What to Do About Synthetic Rubber? Throughout the early stages of the Korean war, the chief bugaboo was the impending reactivation of the Government's synthetic rubber program. Companies feared that Uncle Sam would step into the domestic market and grab 5 to 10 million gallons of industrial alcohol a month. Actually, such apprehensions proved to be unfounded. What eased the situation immeasurably were both the voluntary conversion of some U. S. beverage alcohol facilities to the production of industrial alcohol and the ability of the French to supply the Office of Rubber Reserve with immense quantities of highgrade industrial alcohol. Late last year, the Office of Rubber Reserve began reactivating its butadienefrom-alcohol facilities at Louisville, Ky\, and Kobuta, Pa. ( the formerly governmentowned installation at Institute, W. Va., having been sold some years ago to Carbide and Carbon). At first, only two of the seven butadiene-from-alcohol units at these two government-owned plants were set into operation. Now, however, five units are on stream, with the remaining two expected to b e ready for use in a matter of weeks. When alcohol-butadiene production got under way last November, ORR was obliged to obtain its alcohol at about 90 cents to $1.00 a gallon from domestic distilling units normally used in the production of beverage alcohol ( although actually some of ORlVs suppliers were also producers of industrial alcohol). A short time before, the Reconstruction Finance Corp., the parent organization of the Office of Rubber Reserve, had contracted for the 4937
delivered to the U. S. when only about a year a g o molasses was selling for about 6 cents a gallon. This drastic advance has set m o r e than o n e U . S. alcohol manufac turer clamoring for relief. Alcohol Productive Capacity
Closed-top fermenters a n d temperature-control instruments are familiar features of modern fermentation p l a n t
p u r c h a s e of 112 million gallons of French alcohol, while, at the same time, private U. S. companies had purchased an addi tional 2 8 million gallons of alcohol from France- In December 1950, the first ship ment of French alcohol arrived in N e w Orleans- This alcohol, costing 48.5 cents a gallon at F r e n c h deep-water ports and about 6 3 cents a gallon delivered in t h e U. S., h a s continued to enter this country at a r a t e varying from 2.5 million to 10 million gallons a month. T h e French alcohol industry, w h i c h bases its production largely u p o n sugar beet molasses, is expected to b e in a n ex cellent position to export industrial al cohol t o the U. S. for some time to come. However, a s sizable alcohol reserves in F r a n c e steadily decline, French producers will doubtless not be able to export alcohol in the same large quantities possible at present. Estimates are that R F C will re ceive a b o u t 40 to 5 0 million gallons of F r e n c h alcohol in 1952, although m u c h will d e p e n d upon t h e magnitude of this year's sugar heet crop. However, even if alcohol from F r a n c e should d r o p out of t h e picture entirely, t h e U. S. G o v e r n m e n t could still turn increasingly to other sources of supply, both foreign and domestic. Several m o n t h s ago, the Reconstruction F i n a n c e Corp. contracted to p u r c h a s e 3 1 million gallons of alcohol from domestic producers a t about 7 3 cents a gallon. I n A u g u s t , R F C announced its willingness to b u y a s much as 10 million gallons of al cohol produced from the d a m a g e d grain of flood-stricken Kansas and Missouri. F o r this, R F C agreed to p a y a negotiated price n o t to exceed 7 0 cents a gallon. I n a d d i tion, R F C is slated to obtain 6 million gallons of alcohol from India, 1.3 million gallons from Mexico, and a small q u a n t i t y from Germany. On July 11, Congress approved Public L a w 7 6 , which permits beverage alcohol to 4938
be used for industrial purposes in connec tion with the defense effort—particularly in the synthetic r u b b e r program. Congress enacted a similar law -early in W o r l d W a r II, but this statute was repealed b y Public L a w 4 4 8 in F e b r u a r y 1950. O n c e again, however, it h a s become highly desirable to make beverage alcohol available for in dustrial use, u n d e r proper internal revenue safeguards. Molasses Scarcity Although t h e d e m a n d for molasses in creased sharply a t the .art of t h e Korean war, supplies lagged far behind. Molasses users could readily and quite profitably have t u r n e d out twice as m u c h alcohol last y e a r if only the molasses h a d been available. Despite the m o u n t i n g demand, consumption of molasses in U. S. indus trial alcohol plants declined slightly from 129.1 million gallons of molasses in fiscal year 1950 to 128.5 million gallons in fiscal year 1 9 5 1 . D u r i n g the same period, ex ports of Cuban molasses to t h e United States dropped from 196.4 million to 116.2 million gallons. Largely responsible for this decline h a v e b e e n the substantial purchases of C u b a n blackstrap by Great Britain. T h e British, w h o obtained only 14 million gallons of C u b a n molasses from the 1950 sugar crop, will receive about 56 million gallons of the 1951 output. In addition, the Cubans are holding on to about 3 5 million more gallons of their molasses this year than they did in 1950— partially because of the uncertainty of t h e Iranian oil supply and t h e prospect that Cuban motorists may b e obliged to use more molasses-derived alcohol than ever as automotive fuel. In recent months, U. S. molasses users have n o t only b e e n beset by shortages b u t by greatly increased prices. Currently, al cohol manufacturers h a v e to p a y about 2 7 cents a gallon for molasses in cargo lots C H E M I C A L
At present, t h e United States possesses 58 industrial alcohol plants, the leading alcohol producers being Carbide and C a r bon, Publicker, U. S. Industrial Chemicals, D u Pont, Commercial Solvents, Standard Oil of N e w Jersey, and Shell Chemical. O n e of the most reassuring pieces of news to come out of W a s h i n g t o n in re cent m o n t h s has b e e n the government esti mate that, by t h e e n d of 1952, t h e U . S. synthetic · alcohol industry will h a v e boosted its productive capacity b y over 50 million gallons a year—an a m o u n t equal to approximately 4 5 % of U. S. synthetic alcohol production during fiscal year 1951. C a r b i d e a n d C a r b o n is building a n e w synthetic alcohol plant at Institute, W. Va. S t a n d a r d Oil of N e w Jersey has plans to expand its synthetic alcohol capacity, b u t at present is keeping m u m on details. T h e newly formed National Petro-Chemicals Corp. (owned b y National Distillers and P a n h a n d l e Eastern Pipe L i n e C o . ) will synthesize ethyl alcohol in its plant to be built at Tuscola, 111. American Petro c h e m i c a l Corp. (set up in May by F i r e stone and Cities Service) likewise intends to manufacture synthetic alcohol. C u r rently, Texas E a s t m a n Co. is building a 12-million-gallon-a-year synthetic alcohol plant at Longview, Tex., with completion expected b y J a n u a r y 1952. T h e plant's o u t p u t , which -will also include rc-butyra l d e h y d e and 2-ethylhexanol, will go p r i n cipally to Tennessee Eastman in Kingsport, Tenn. T o d a y , U. S. chemical companies are boosting their synthetic alcohol capacity, or possibly are just entering the synthetic alcohol field for the very first time, not b e cause they hopefully foresee the flowering of a great number of n e w uses for ethyl alcohol or, for that matter, t h e drastic ex pansion of existing uses. Rather, manufac turers are convinced t h a t alcohol from ethylene will slowly b u t inevitably t a k e the place of alcohol n o w being made b y fermentation. T h e fact t h a t t h e production of alcohol from molasses—the r a w material w h i c h traditionally has been the backbone of the U. S. alcohol industry—has declined year after year since 1948, while, at t h e same time, synthetic alcohol production has steadily advanced, is indication enough t h a t synthetic alcohol is far and away t h e odds-on favorite of the future. W h a t with industrial alcohol production currently a t its highest level since W o r l d W a r I I . . . w h a t with n e w alcohol plants abuilding or o n t h e drafting boards . . . w h a t with imported alcohol pouring into U . S. ports . . . a n d what ΛΤπίη t h e b e v e r age industry ready, if necessary, to con vert overnight to t h e production of i n d u s trial alcohol—ethyl alcohol t o d a y is one of t h e b r i g h t e r aspects of the total national economy. A N D
ENGINEERIN G
NEWS
