Launch HN: Rise Reforming (YC S26) – Turning Waste Gases into Valuable Chemicals

Post by jonavanoord » Tue, Jul 28, 2026, 3:40 AM UTC

Johnny_Bonk wrote: post #18

jonavanoord wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks for the comment and the kind words! That does sound like a pretty cool technology! Is 3-hydroxy-butyrate a specialty chemical? Or would you also end up selling it as a commodity? What does the process look like in going from syngas to 3-hydroxy-butyrate?

It was using genetically modified bacteria via industrial fermentation. It's essentially a specialty chemical used in pharma, automotive, paints & adhesives and theoretically for biodegradable plastics but unfortunately PHB (the plastic you can make out of it) doesn't have great properties. All in all, the 3HB market was pretty small with tight supply chains and not a huge amount of growth. I'm sure you guys will hav…

Post by jonavanoord » Tue, Jul 28, 2026, 3:49 AM UTC

cyberax wrote: post #20

jonavanoord wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We do it with biogas specifically because it enables us to produce chemicals with a 90% lower carbon footprint. Our thesis has always been that when you combine cheap waste feedstocks and an efficent enough process, you could produce green chemicals that are cost competitive with the fossil alternative. Biogas is the ideal waste feedstock because it gives us a low CI, is produced 24/7 and is quite consistent in its c…

I think the first priority for you should be getting _something_ built and proving your core technology. But you are making it harder for yourself by adding more variables. Natural gas is abundant in some areas and is wasted. If you can prove that you can build cost-efficient small-scale synthesis units, then moving to biogas should later be a no-brainer. I'm also pretty sure that you need to pre-treat the gas to rem…

Post by cyberax » Tue, Jul 28, 2026, 7:54 AM UTC

jonavanoord wrote: post #33

cyberax wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the first priority for you should be getting _something_ built and proving your core technology. But you are making it harder for yourself by adding more variables. Natural gas is abundant in some areas and is wasted. If you can prove that you can build cost-efficient small-scale synthesis units, then moving to biogas should later be a no-brainer. I'm also pretty sure that you need to pre-treat the gas to rem…

Really appreciate the critical comments. I'd love to give some insight into how we look at these different ideas. I wholeheartedly agree that the priority should be to get something built. We are currently in the process of doing that at a wastewater treatment plant. There is obviously additional risk in doing that at a biogas site. We believe we have the team and the technology to achieve that. We do actually use qu…

Post by gus_massa » Tue, Jul 28, 2026, 2:18 PM UTC

jonavanoord wrote: post #34

cyberax wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A technology that would reduce the amount of uselessly flared natural gas is going to help in itself. It's not a question of abandoning principles, but starting from something that is easier to do and reducing the risk of not getting _anything_ out.

We are not not interested in flared natural gas sites. It is often just a logistical question of where we are going to get the CO2 from.

Post by fuzzfactor » Tue, Jul 28, 2026, 2:40 PM UTC

awad wrote: post #32

jonavanoord wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Awesome question! I've spent all of my time this summer grinding out both the biogas supply and the chemical offtake and I think it will always be slightly easier to convince someone to let you buy something from them than to get someone to buy something from you. We do also intend to always be ahead on biogas supply volumes (ensuring we have more signed biogas supply than signed chemical offtake). Overall I think th…

How does one reach you privately? Not seeing anything on your HN bio