Six startups born out of Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory technologies made presentations at a recent entrepreneurial event to attract investors.
The companies -- which have licensed technologies in biotech, renewable energy, sensors, infrared imaging and health care -- showcased their capabilities at the Entrepreneurs-in-Readiness (EIR) event at the Livermore Valley Open Campus' High Performance Computing Innovation Center.
The event was part of an EIR program developed by the Lab's Industrial Partnerships Office (IPO) to connect nascent companies with entrepreneurs and investors. The idea is to engage a diverse group of entrepreneurs and industry experts from Silicon Valley to help nurture promising new early stage Lab technology companies toward commercialization.
ipo.llnl.gov
2. End-to-End Biological Hydrogen Production
NADP+
NADPH
2H+
H2
NLP
Hydrogenase
Electrochemical
cofactor reduction,
Rh-nanocatalysis
- Novel in-vitro biological hydrogen production. - Microbial membrane hydrogenase enzyme stabilized, outside cell using LLNL NanoLipoproptein Particle (NLP) technology. -‘Force Multiplier’ (~10-15X production rate) over in-vivo. Overall high yield reaction. - Utilize novel electrochemical flow cell concept to supply electrons to cofactor & NLP-hydrogenase. - No biomass (water/electricity/enzymes/cofactor are essential materials). - No Carbon footprint/completely renewable/”green”.
-Low CAPEX
-Potential to get to $1-2/kg H2 total production cost at scale.
(from aqueous solution/mineral acid)
3. Applications/Markets
•Global Hydrogen Market=$135B+/yr
•Replace/Augment/Compete with SMR (steam methane reforming) H2 creation in petro/chemical/industrial gas plants
•Improve/Lower cost for existing chemical production processes (i.e. H2O2)
•Small/Local/Autonomous H2 Device for Distributed Solutions
•China-Bolster Poor Quality Indigenous Petroleum/Alternative to SMR as very limited Indigenous Natural Gas (NG).
•Biological/Microbial Fuel Cell (Coupling Production with Storage).
•Generic In Vitro Enzyme Stabilization/ ‘Force Multiplier’ for Industrial enzyme-enabled Products.
•Coal-Fired Plants (SO2 ‘eating’ capabilities of Pyrococcus furiosus)
•Rubber and Pharma/Vaccines (beyond scope of current LLNL contract)
4. Inexpensive Ex vivo Production of Molecular Hydrogen
Materials
To be confirmed-Projected cost of all materials less than $1.50/kg H2
- Final costs here function of strategic partner agreement with our supplier (in negotiations with (3)).
- NLP-Hydrogenase is self- assembling/formed in simple reactor, using lower cost synthetic apolipoprotiens, well-established extrication process
- NADP will likely recycle very many times in our reaction
- Low cost mineral acid (replenish protons in aqueous solution)
- NLP-hydrogenase and cofactor are long-lasting, not consumed, and small quantities necessary as effectively ‘recycled’
Electricity
(Current)
CAPEX
-Much less electricity required than any form electrolysis
-No OH bonds broken in
cofactor reaction or
H2 generation reaction
-Minimal voltage
required (0.5V)
-Access off-peak excess (could be cheap coal-fired, nuclear, overcapacity solar/wind generated---lowest cost is
primary goal)
-Very low CAPEX estimate= $0.08/kg H2 output
-Ambient operating conditions (much less costly than Pressure/Temp of SMR)
-Minimal, standard/non- complex equipment necessary for bio-refinery
-Includes Rh as fixed/amortized cost (as ‘recycles’)
5. SMR vs. Renewable H2 Production
•SMR: Pros-Cheap/plentiful NG (many but not all geographies) -Amortized plant infrastructure Cons-CAPEX-intensive -Non-renewable -Pressure/Temp requirements -Dependency on potentially antagonistic countries/leaders for natural gas supply -Non-predictability of NG spot prices (and effects on BP EPS predictability)
•Water Electrolysis: Pros-Proven -Ever-improving electrolyzers -Clean/Green -Water as feedstock Cons-Uses very large amounts of electricity -Been around 100+ years yet still cannot compete with SMR on price
•En-Vivo Biology (i.e. algae creation H2): -Pros-Sunlight is free -Microbes make hydrogen naturally or can be genetically manipulated to -Microbes are consumers of CO2 Cons-Surface-area centric solution (real estate is very expensive terrestrially and any scale-up in ocean would have huge environmental effects) -The more HC or H2 you make inside the cell wall, the higher probability of killing the organism/production mechanism
•In-Vitro Biology (Nzyme2HC/LLNL): Pros-Potentially very high yield H2 -Totally renewable -No dependence on natural gas geopolitical supply issues -Potential to get to $1-2/kg total production cost of H2 at scale -Could be centralized or distributed solution Challenges-We must prove our assumptions and estimates with a funded prototype
6. Nzyme2HC Management Team
•Steve Cardona-CEO -Funding/Strategic Alliances/DOE Interface/Overall Management -Successful clean tech serial entrepreneur (Co-founder Carbon Micro Battery, now Enevate,-DFJ and Tsing Capital funded, over $30M raised (grants, angel, VC)) -IBM/KPMG/Oracle executive -UCLA-BA Economics, Minor-Biology/USC MBA Finance
•Dr. Paul Hoeprich-Chief Scientific Advisor -Research/Design/Develop/Overall Product Development -LLNL Senior Staff Scientist -World-renowned inventor/expert in NLPs (nano lipoprotein particles/membranes) -Will manage the Product Development effort in the lab vs. timeline, budget and deliverables
•Dr. Robert Glass -Senior Scientist LLNL (30 years) -Head of Fuel Cell and Hydrogen Program at LLNL -PhD Chemistry/Electrochemistry, University Illinois Champaign Urbana -Responsible for electrical flow cell/electron supply to biological reaction
•Dr. Michael P. Thelen -Senior Scientist at LLNL (21 years) -PhD Biochemistry, Cambridge University England -Responsible for growing, harvesting and extricating hydrogenase enzyme
•Bill Schank-Chief Technology Advisor -Engineering/Manufacturability -35 years Ford Motor Company-leader hydrogen fuel/EV car projects -Chief Engineer Ballard Hydrogen Fuel Cell -Ran US Advanced Battery Consortium for 7 years
•Michael McGrath-Finance/Accounting:
-President Financial Advocates - Former KPMG executive
7. From Science to Geopolitics
(Source:moneymorning.com.au)
-Although the US has plentiful cheap fracked natural gas to create hydrogen from SMR. -Putin’s recent saber-rattling regarding pulling European and Chinese NG supplies has caused many countries and companies to start looking for cost-effective alternatives to steam methane reforming.
8. Investment Terms
•Total Cap Req 24 months=$2.6M/Possible $600K ‘build only’ 6 mos initial tranche
•Usage of Funds: Build bench prototype, integrate components, test, optimize.
•The product development portion of the funds will pass through Nzyme2HC to LLNL as sponsored agreement