Prepared for lenders, CDCs, and federal agencies to SBA SOP 50 10 8, USDA 7 CFR Part 5001, and conventional underwriting standards. Fiduciary duty runs to the lender and the agency, never the borrower. 4,000+ engagements since 1998 covering $41.2 billion in evaluated project value. So far in 2026: 41 engagements and $1.54 billion evaluated — 17 SBA, 11 USDA.
Biofuel feasibility is feedstock-spread analysis under policy exposure: the margin between feedstock cost and fuel value including credits, feedstock supply security within economic reach, offtake agreements and blending demand, and the policy instruments — RFS volumes, LCFS, tax credits — modeled at conservative value and duration. Ethanol, biodiesel, renewable diesel, and SAF each carry distinct technology and margin profiles the study addresses specifically.
The analysis combines feedstock supply mapping and pricing, credit and fuel price series, offtake review, and capital benchmarks by pathway. Spread sensitivity with reduced credit value is the controlling stress case.
Every Wert-Berater financial model is fully linked with no hardcoded values, so any reviewer can stress any input. Deliverables comprise a complete narrative report and the linked Excel model, with ten-year pro forma, sensitivity analysis at ±5, 10, and 15 percent, interest-rate stress from +0.5 to +3.0 percent, and ratio analysis benchmarked against RMA and IBISWorld data.
SBA engagements are prepared to SOP 50 10 8, including its debt-service-coverage minimums of 1.15x operating and 1.00x global. USDA engagements follow RD Staff Instruction 5001 across the Business & Industry, Community Facilities, REAP, and Value-Added Producer Grant programs. Conventional engagements are built to the lender's stated coverage standard, typically 1.20x. Clean-energy engagements are prepared to USDA 7 CFR Part 5001 where REAP and B&I apply — including the energy-production documentation, incentive analysis, and payback arithmetic REAP requires — and to conventional and institutional standards otherwise, with interconnection and incentive risk addressed directly rather than assumed away.
Representative clean-energy work includes a $52,688,000 green carbon project evaluation and renewable-energy feasibility within the firm's USDA REAP and B&I practice. Independence is non-negotiable: determinations follow the evidence and are not revised under pressure, and studies are built to pass lender, agency, and third-party review without exception items.
A biofuel refinery feasibility study is not a generic capital-project analysis with the word “ethanol” inserted. The scope is built around the specific conversion pathway — corn-starch ethanol, cellulosic ethanol, soybean or waste-oil biodiesel, hydrotreated vegetable oil renewable diesel, or sustainable aviation fuel — because feedstock logistics, capital intensity, co-product revenue, and credit eligibility differ materially across pathways. The narrative report addresses each of those dimensions explicitly, not as a footnote.
Every model is a fully linked Excel workbook with no hardcoded values, published to a secure client portal where it recalculates live when any input changes.
Demand for renewable fuels is not measured by counting local customers. It is measured by assessing the regulatory mandate that creates the market, the physical blending infrastructure that connects the plant to that market, and the competitive supply already positioned to serve it. The analysis works outward from those three anchors.
Mandate-driven demand begins with published EPA Renewable Fuel Standard volume obligations and, where the project sells into a state program, the relevant Low Carbon Fuel Standard credit schedule. Both are public regulatory records reviewed at their current values and stress-tested at reduced values, because mandate levels are subject to EPA rulemaking and court review.
Blending infrastructure is assessed through terminal operator records, rack pricing data, and publicly available pipeline and terminal maps that establish whether the plant can physically reach demand at a transportation cost the margin can absorb. Where rail or truck is the route to market, logistics cost enters the spread model directly.
Competitive supply is evaluated using EPA RFS registration data, state environmental permit records, and industry capacity databases that identify existing and announced production within the relevant fuel category. USDA Agricultural Marketing Service data, Energy Information Administration production and stock reports, and trade association capacity surveys are the principal public sources. The goal is a defensible estimate of whether incremental supply from the proposed plant tightens or displaces into an already-supplied market.
Four inputs account for most of the variance in a renewable-fuel coverage ratio. Each is tested independently and in combination because their risks are correlated: a crush-margin compression event typically moves feedstock cost, fuel price, and credit value simultaneously in adverse directions.
The sensitivity matrix runs each variable at ±5, 10, and 15 percent and interest rates from +0.5 to +3.0 percent, so a reviewer can locate the break-even input value for any assumption.
Lenders and agencies reviewing a biofuel project raise a consistent set of concerns that differ from those applied to a retail or real-estate credit. Understanding those concerns shapes how the study is organized and what it must demonstrate.
SBA lenders applying SOP 50 10 8 require a 1.15x operating coverage minimum and a 1.00x global coverage minimum. For a commodity-margin business, the examiner focus is on whether the coverage ratio is durable across the feedstock-price cycle, not merely achievable at a single point in time. The study must show that the debt-service cushion survives the spread compressions documented in the historical record.
USDA Business & Industry and REAP reviewers add energy-production documentation requirements: the REAP application specifically requires a payback calculation, an energy-savings or production estimate, and an incentive analysis. The study addresses each of those elements as discrete sections, not as incidental commentary. Where the project involves a value-added agricultural commodity, the Value-Added Producer Grant eligibility analysis is incorporated.
Conventional lenders, typically underwriting to a 1.20x coverage standard, focus on offtake contract quality, counterparty creditworthiness, and the term match between debt maturity and the remaining life of any policy instrument supporting the margin. A credit that depends on a tax credit expiring in year four of a ten-year loan requires explicit treatment of the post-expiration cash flow, not an assumption that the credit will be extended.
Wert-Berater’s fiduciary duty runs to the lender and the reviewing agency. No fee is contingent on the finding, and no determination is revised under sponsor pressure.
The engagement begins with a fixed fee quoted within one business day of inquiry. The fee does not change based on the outcome of the analysis, and no portion is contingent on a favorable finding. That structure is the mechanical expression of independence: an analyst whose fee depends on a positive conclusion has a conflict that no disclosure cures.
Delivery runs 10 to 15 business days from receipt of a complete data room. For a biofuel project, a complete data room includes the site and technology description, any engineering or process design documents available, feedstock supply agreements or letters of intent, offtake agreements or term sheets, the proposed capital structure and loan terms, three years of operating history if the project involves an acquisition or expansion, and the developer’s own projections if prepared. Rush delivery is available and quoted at the time of engagement.
Once the engagement opens, the financial model is published to a secure client portal. The model is a fully linked Excel workbook with no hardcoded values; every assumption cell is exposed and labeled. When the lender, agency reviewer, or sponsor updates an input — a revised feedstock contract price, a changed loan term, a new RIN price assumption — the model recalculates immediately. There is no need to request a revised report for routine sensitivity work.
The deliverable package comprises the bound narrative report, the live Excel model, the ten-year pro forma, the full sensitivity matrix, and an explicit statement of the conditions that must hold for the projections to be achievable. That statement of conditions is the document a credit officer reads first.
The fee is fixed and quoted within one business day of inquiry. It does not vary based on the outcome of the analysis, and no portion is contingent on a favorable finding. Because project scope, pathway complexity, and data-room completeness affect the work required, the firm quotes each engagement individually rather than publishing a schedule.
Standard delivery is 10 to 15 business days from receipt of a complete data room. The clock starts when all required documents are received, not when the engagement opens. Rush delivery is available and priced at the time of engagement. Incomplete data rooms are the most common cause of delay.
The margin is a spread between two volatile commodity prices — feedstock cost and fuel value — that can compress simultaneously. A significant portion of that margin often comes from policy instruments, such as RIN credits or tax credits, whose value and duration are subject to regulatory and legislative change. A credible study must demonstrate coverage at reduced or zero credit value, not only at current market levels.
Yes. The study is structured to satisfy SBA SOP 50 10 8 coverage requirements and USDA 7 CFR Part 5001 simultaneously where both programs apply. REAP-specific elements — energy-production documentation, payback arithmetic, and incentive analysis — are prepared as discrete sections that meet the program’s stated requirements, not embedded as general commentary.
The study addresses corn-starch ethanol, cellulosic ethanol, soybean-oil and waste-oil biodiesel, hydrotreated vegetable oil renewable diesel, and sustainable aviation fuel. Each pathway carries a distinct capital cost profile, co-product revenue stream, and credit eligibility, and each is analyzed on its own terms rather than through a generic biofuel template.
No. A feasibility study is an independent analytical determination of whether a project’s projected cash flows support the proposed debt service under stated assumptions. Loan approval is the lender’s decision. The study is prepared to pass lender, agency, and third-party review, but it does not predetermine or guarantee any credit outcome.
Qualify a project. Tell us about the project and the program. We will tell you the truth about it — scope, timeline, and fee confirmed before work begins.
Schedule a Zoom Call →Legal disclosure. Wert-Berater, Inc. offices are mailing addresses only. Following the COVID-19 pandemic the firm has elected to work remotely; its office locations receive mail and are not staffed for visitors or in-person meetings. Headquarters mailing address: 1968 South Coast Hwy, Ste 2382, Laguna Beach, CA 92651.
Wert-Berater, Inc. is an independent provider of feasibility studies and other related services. The firm does not provide financing or equity investment advice, and does not arrange, broker, or place debt or equity capital of any kind.
All appraisal assignments are performed by Bruce E. Jones, MAI, ASA-GC, BCA, CMEA, a member of the Appraisal Institute since 2006, a staff member of Wert-Berater, Inc. and owner of Special Purpose Realty Valuation.