GoodFuels

Happy Anniversary Ethanol

It will be interesting to see how the assault on ethanol by a food industry-backed organization will be portrayed in the media. I hope they can see through this blatant attempt to justify higher food prices by continuing to disparage the ethanol industry.

“On the occasion of the 30th anniversary of ethanol subsidies,” the group Food Before Fuel called for a repeal of “subsidies for ethanol in light of its harmful effects on the environment, consumers and numerous industries.”

Now, they released a poll that asked obviously leading questions to prove that the majority of Americans support them. It showed that a majority are concerned about the rising cost of food. That’s understandable. Then the poll goes on: When provided with information about USDA data showing corn ethanol production is the cause of 10 percent of food price inflation, nearly half (49%) become less likely to support policies aimed at promoting the use of corn to produce ethanol. Moreover, when asked if they would support keeping or changing the existing Congressional policies, a majority (56%) of respondents call for Congress to change these policies by reducing or eliminating subsidies and mandates for the use of corn ethanol.

How about if you provided them with information about the profits of companies like Kraft, Kellogg, Sara Lee, and Dean’s Foods - especially in the most recent quarter since corn and oil prices have dropped significantly? Might have different results.

I did tune in for the press conference today during the Cellulosic Ethanol Summit. There were a few questions from the live audience, but the phone system must not have been working because “they had no questions from the phones” even though I was pushing the right buttons! One reporter did ask the organization if it was “collaborating with the oil companies” who might also like to see ethanol subsidies go away. The answer was “not on a regular basis” only during certain times like during the energy bill debate.

The speakers for the group played on the analogy that ethanol was a 30-year-old “problem child” still living in the basement who needs to get kicked out of the house. Renewable Fuels Association president Bob Dinneen said, “It’s a cute analogy but the problem is there’s somebody else living in that house and it’s the 120-year-old oil industry that continues to be subsidized.”

“We’re celebrating today as well,” Dinneen said. “We’re celebrating 30 years of giving back to this country in terms of increased economic development, reduced farm program savings, lower balance of trade, reduced emissions attributable to renewable fuels. This is a 30 year success story and not one you want to kick out of the house.”

Happy anniversary, ethanol!

Professor: Think clearly about oil

In his article on the Huffington Post, Bruce Dale, a professor at Michigan State University in the department of Chemical Engineering & Materials Science, clarifies some misconceptions about ethanol and oil.  Namely, that we use far less oil to produce ethanol than we do to produce gasoline.

From a national security perspective, the most relevant question is, “How much oil does ethanol replace?” The answer might surprise you. Very little oil - mostly diesel fuel for planting, tilling and harvesting crops - is required to produce ethanol. A recent publication in the journal Science shows that only about 0.04 MJ (mega joule, a measure of energy content) of petroleum is required to produce one MJ of ethanol. That is a 25:1 advantage in favor of ethanol production. Because ethanol has less energy per gallon than gasoline, we get more than 30 gallons of ethanol for every gallon of oil we “invest” to make the ethanol, versus eight-tenths of a gallon of gasoline per gallon of oil. When ethanol is used as E85 fuel in a flex-fuel vehicle, we are effectively getting around 800 miles per gallon of oil consumed.

Dale goes on to discuss the merits of an expanded renewable fuels industry in the United States.

Thus, overall domestic fuel supplies are stretched far into the future when we take our own oil and use it to produce ethanol from our domestic agricultural and forest materials. Ethanol from corn and the much larger amounts of grassoline that are on the way are the only near-term petroleum alternatives we have that significantly enhance national security by replacing lots and lots of oil.

His arguments are concise and well thought out. Check out the whole article here.

Photo: Brankshoots on Flickr

Flex-Fueling the Bail Out

A bail-out for the auto industry could result in more flex-fueled vehicles on the road faster.

Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi announced Saturday that the plan would require auto makers to embrace more fuel efficient cars and new auto technologies and that existing funds from the $700 billion Troubled Asset Relief Program to be used to help the auto industry - meaning no new money would be authorized by Congress under this plan.

Pelosi said the plan must include the restructuring of the companies “to ensure their long-term economic viability,” new fuel-efficiency standards, and the development of advanced vehicles. She also said it would include “even stronger limits on executive compensation and assurances to protect the taxpayer.”

This is very similar to what Senator Chuck Grassley asked for in a letter sent Friday to Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid. Grassley told them first of all that it was important any legislation contain “restrictions on executive salaries, compensation packages and excessive internal spending.”

“Additionally, auto manufacturers participating in any financial assistance program should be asked to make a renewed commitment to developing and producing automobiles with advanced technologies that significantly improve fuel efficiency as well as to embrace alternative fuels more fully than they have done to date. The domestic auto manufacturers have shown leadership in producing flex-fuel vehicles (FFV) and have informally committed to increase FFV production to 50 percent of all vehicles by 2012. However, taxpayer money must be accompanied by enforceable commitments to FFV production and alternative fuel use. Any auto company which accepts federal financial assistance should agree to an enforceable commitment to produce 100 percent FFV’s in the shortest possible time frame.”

“Auto manufacturers have so far been reluctant to embrace the use of mid-level or intermediate blends of alternative fuels. To reduce our dependence on foreign oil and ensure the greatest possible use of alternative fuels as quickly as possible, auto manufacturers must also commit to support and advocate intermediate blends of alternative fuel.”

If those conditions are actually spelled out in the bail-out legislation and carried out by the auto industry, this could wind up being a real benefit for not only the ethanol industry, but consumers as well by giving them a real choice at the pump.