Conventional chemical plant is designed around a feedstock of known and consistent composition. A biorefinery is not. Agricultural residues, waste oils, municipal feedstocks and energy crops vary by season, by supplier and by batch, and that variability propagates through every downstream unit operation. Designing for it, rather than designing for a nominal analysis and hoping, is the single biggest determinant of whether a biorefinery meets its nameplate.

Projex Solutions provides engineering design, feasibility and FEED studies, process safety support and EPCM delivery for biorefineries and bio-based chemical production.

What makes this work different

Feedstock variability is the design case. Moisture, contaminant and composition ranges have to be established and then designed for across pretreatment, conversion and separation. Equipment sized on a mean analysis will underperform on the tails.

Funding gates require defined engineering. The Sustainable Aviation Fuel Act 2026 introduced revenue certainty contracts for SAF producers, and the SAF Mandate has been in force since 2025 with obligation levels rising towards 2040 and a power-to-liquid sub-obligation from 2028. Each of these requires a technical and cost case at FEED definition, not concept definition.

Ethanol and solvent handling brings DSEAR. Fermentation and separation trains hold substantial flammable inventory, requiring hazardous area classification to BS EN IEC 60079-10-1:2021 and EI 15 (5th edition, 2024), and potentially COMAH duties.

Fermentation carries CO2 asphyxiation risk. Large-scale fermentation displaces oxygen in confined and semi-confined spaces, and this is consistently under-assessed on plant designed by teams from a chemical rather than a brewing background.

UK ETS is approaching. A voluntary monitoring, reporting and verification period opened in January 2026 covering advanced conversion technologies, non-mechanical recycling and SAF production above the Small Waste Incineration Plant thresholds. Mandatory dates are not yet confirmed, but the instrumentation lead time is real.

Scale-up from pilot is where projects fail. Heat and mass transfer, solids handling and separation all behave differently at commercial scale.

Where we help

  • Feasibility and FEED studies developed to the definition a funding gate requires, with estimate accuracy stated up front
  • Feedstock variability assessment and design for range rather than nominal
  • Fermentation and bioprocess scale-up engineering
  • DSEAR assessment and hazardous area classification for ethanol and solvent service
  • CO2 asphyxiation risk assessment, ventilation design and monitoring strategy
  • HAZOP and HAZID facilitation on plant with limited design precedent
  • Environmental permitting support, including emissions and effluent
  • UK ETS readiness, covering metering, sampling and biogenic fraction determination
  • Detailed multi-discipline design and EPCM delivery under ISO 9001:2015

Typical reasons clients get in touch

  • A funding application requires FEED-level definition and a defensible cost estimate
  • Feedstock supply has changed and the plant is not performing as designed
  • Scale-up from pilot needs proper engineering rather than extrapolation
  • CO2 or ethanol hazards have not been formally assessed
  • UK ETS voluntary MRV participation requires instrumentation the site lacks
  • An existing asset is being repurposed for bio-based production

Related

Part of our work across the energy sector and the chemical sector.

Standards and regulations we work to

  • COMAH 2015, where ethanol or other flammable inventory crosses threshold
  • DSEAR 2002, with ACOP L138 (second edition, 2013)
  • BS EN IEC 60079-10-1:2021 and EI 15 (5th edition, October 2024)
  • BS EN 61511-1:2017+A1:2017 for functional safety
  • Environmental Permitting (England and Wales) Regulations 2016 (as amended)
  • UK ETS, with a voluntary monitoring, reporting and verification period open since January 2026 for qualifying facilities
  • RTFO and the SAF Mandate, in force since 2025
  • PSSR 2000, with guidance L122 (2014)
  • CDM 2015 and ISO 9001:2015

Frequently asked questions

How much definition does a funding application actually need?
More than concept work provides. Revenue certainty contracts and allocation rounds are assessed on technical and cost credibility, which in practice means FEED-level definition with a stated estimate accuracy band. We would rather tell you the estimate is ±30% and defensible than ±10% and optimistic.

Our feedstock varies. How do you design for that?
By establishing the actual range for moisture, contaminants and composition, then designing pretreatment, conversion and separation for the range rather than the mean. Equipment sized on an average analysis will underperform whenever the feedstock sits at either tail, which on waste-derived feedstocks is often.

Is CO2 really a serious hazard on a fermentation plant?
Yes, and it is consistently underestimated by teams from a chemical rather than a brewing background. CO2 is denser than air, accumulates in low-level and confined spaces, and gives no warning. It needs ventilation design and monitoring based on credible release scenarios.

What does UK ETS readiness involve?
Metering, sampling and biogenic fraction determination, most of which requires instrumentation that existing plant does not have. Mandatory dates are not yet confirmed, but the lead time on instrumentation is real and worth planning against now.

Can you assess an existing asset for repurposing?
Yes. Condition, materials of construction and remaining life all determine what can realistically be reused, and an honest assessment early usually saves more than it costs.

Talk to us about your project. Request a call