Ethanol Gets Spring Break: From Negative Media Campaign

Good Ethanol News Takes Root

After getting pounded for past 24 months by a what-the-hail storm of negative stories in the media --  in some cases claiming ethanol was even worse than fossil fuels or imported oil – good news finally blossomed.  In the past months stories about the positive impact of ethanol have flourished and rained on the anti-ethanol parade. The new articles, reports, and even a new presidential biofuels directive show the depth and breath of research and support to continue to push for the advancement of ethanol technologies and the nation’s renewable fuel standard.

First.. a little context and perspective on the anti-ethanol campaign:

Can you think of another product that has…

1. A stellar 30 year performance record...

2. A market penetration of nearly 100% in some states an 80% nationally...

3. Enough credible public policy merits to sustain the support of six presidents, twelve Congressional sessions...

4. Been tested by nearly every federal agency...

5. Been under full warranty for nearly 20 years by the manufacturers of products that use it (Chyryserl, Ford, GM)...

6. Created over 500,000 jobs

7. Saved billions of tax dollars when compared to the cost.

…yet there continues to be unprecedented onslaught of unfounded negative claims in the media – for thirty years?  The competition must really be worried.

Research is Countering Myths About Ethanol

Food Vs. Fuel Myth: The End of An [addition] Error

Simply Stated and Proven: Yields are up, acres are down, and “Net” Corn Usage is on the Decline

Ethanol Has a Positive Energy Balance: Game/Set/Match
Since the days of moonshiner's ethanol critics have claimed ethanol has a negative energy balance (i.e., more used in the manufacturing than left in the product) . Since the fuel was first introduced into commerce 30 years the claims come by like annuals in a flower bed... Unlike coal which has at least a 33% negative energy balance, and where the U.S. gets over half of its electricity, ethanol has a positive energy balance.  A recent report by the Clean Fuel Foundation’s Ethanol Across America education campaign stated ……

According to a new study released here today, the energy efficiency of ethanol plants is steadily improving, with modern ethanol plants using 20% less energy than just four years ago. Originally produced in 2004, this new edition looked at numerous studies and independent analyses of ethanol production facilities over the past decade. U.S. Senator Tim Johnson (D-SD), a member of the Ethanol Across America Advisory Board, noted that the study debunks outdated and erroneous information on ethanol plants that critics have used for the past 30 years.   "The facts speak for themselves in that today's ethanol plants are producing more energy in the form of domestic transportation fuels and using considerably less energy to do so," said Senator Johnson.  “Energy audits, independent studies, and government research all confirm that ethanol is a net energy producer and that we are constantly improving technology."

Farmers Produce Food, Fuel and Feed: With Minimal Price Impact
Congressional Budget Office Report on Ethanol Shows Limited Effect on Food Costs The report states that increased ethanol production caused a mere 0.5 and 0.8 percentage point increase in the price of food between April 2007 and April 2008.

“Over the same period [April 2007 to April 2008], certain other factors – for example, higher energy costs – had a greater effect on food prices than did the use of ethanol as a motor fuel.” Additionally, the CBO report noted that ethanol does reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions compared to gasoline. In fact, recent research published in Yale’s Journal of Industrial Ecology found that ethanol canreduce GHG emissions compared to gasoline between 40 and 59%.

Ethanol Reduces Greenhouse Gases

New assaults from ethanol detractors claimed ethanol contributes to greenhouse gases. This was a natural evolution of the unfounded claim that ethanol had a negative energy balance.  While on the other hand, there have been several studies showing ethanol reduces greenhouse gases by up to 80%. This was verified by a report recently commissioned by the International Energy Agency (IEA) Bioenergy Task 39.

The results were announced by the Global Renewable Fuels Alliance (GRFA),the important conclusion was that GHG reductions will grow by over 100% from 1995 to 2015. “I think what the study has documented is the importance of time in life cycle assessment work,” said report author Don O’Connor. “This issue in general has been overlooked by people.” GRFA spokesperson Bliss Baker says the report clearly illustrates the improving environmental performance of ethanol compared to gasoline. “This report demonstrates that governments must develop energy policies that take into account the increasing efficiency of global ethanol production and do not rely on out-of-date data and out-dated straw man arguments,” said Baker.

Ethanol Does Not Have an Impact on Indirect Land Use Change
When the unfounded claims that ethanol was contributing to greenhouse gases were refuted, the next evolution of the attack on ethanol was to claim that it had a negative impact on “indirect land use.” Basically this theory, not science, blames the use of biofuels in the United States for tearing down the Amazon and need for planting crops in other countries.

Because the “indirect land use” issue plays a critical role in a low carbon fuel strategy, 100 scientists recently wrote the governor of California asking him to reconsider his state’s effort to include indirect land use.  Today California responded by saying they would take it under advisement. Background:"Two studies posted last week on ScienceExpress -- an advance web version of Science Magazine -- and widely reported in the press, raise important issues but often read like conclusions looking for an underlying rationale.  These two studies fundamentally misunderstand the local forces behind land use change issues and make no provision for mitigating impacts such as the slowdown in urbanization that a vibrant agricultural economy would bring.  Further, these two studies somewhat conflict with one another, with one supporting cellulosic ethanol and the other one opposing it, except if produced from waste." U.S. Department of Energy, Argonne National Lab, National Renewable Energy Lab, Oak Ridge National Lab, Pacific Northwest Lab, and the U.S. Department of Agriculture. Clean Fuels Blog, March 28, 2008 (additional quotes and references).

Transparency, Replication & Controversy: From the Start to Now -- Searchinger does not make his model available, along with the parameters used, so that others can attempt to replicate the results.  His work is therefore not susceptible to peer review, and it all raises serious questions about how the journal Science refereed it and accepted it for publication. On the other hand, there are several models globally that are peer reviewed. Over 100 of the nation's top scientists called on CARB to eliminate biases in the proposed Low Carbon Fuel Standard saying current proposal favors fossil fuels. The scientists acknowledged that all fuels have indirect carbon effects, but challenged the notion that they are well understood and are particularly critical of the plan to enforce indirect carbon effects on biofuels only.  The letter is available at this link

But what makes their model truly discriminatory is the failure to account for the environmental impact of indirect activities, such as the military operations related to our oil use. Gal Luft, executive director of the Institute for the Analysis of Global Security - LA Times, April 16, 2009

Ethanol and Water Usage: Did you know that 96% of corn is not irrigated?

A recent study from the University of Minnesota claims that ethanol production is resulting in a dramatic increase in water use.However, the report fails to take into account numerous factors that must be part of the water use discussion. The National Renewable Energy Laboratory estimates that 96 percent of all the corn used in ethanol production comes from non-irrigated acres. New technologies are making ethanol production more efficient. Since 2001, water use at ethanol biorefineries is down by more than 26%, with some plants experiencing even greater reductions. On the other hand, the water profile of petroleum, for instance, is getting dramatically worse as tar sands and other marginal sources of petroleum gain greater market share.Download Water Usage NEB.

National Commission on Energy Policy Report: Government Fuel Goals Will Require Higher Ethanol Blends

A new report on biofuels is urging that better infrastructure and more aggressive policies necessary if the nation is to meet its mandates for ethanol and other alternative fuels. The report, by the National Commission on Energy Policy, argues that the nation needs to increase the amount of ethanol blended into gasoline, as well as make it easier for biofuels plants and pipelines to get government permits and make it easier to transport ethanol.

And Leading the Spring Good News Parade... The Leader of the Free World...

Presidential Biofuels Directive

President Obama: $800 Million for Biofuels and Flex-Fuel Vehicles

 

Experts Respond to Land Use: Data Abuse

While serving as a moderator during the recent Ethanol 2008: Emerging Issues Forum in Omaha I had some unique time to reflect on many of the obstacles and emerging issues that ethanol has faced – like the recent land use issue.  This new scuttlebutt appears to be in the same historical vain as past emerging issues that fell victim to the rapid media response to disseminate misinformation that was not given a proper or fair chance for peer review before publishing.  And once again, we have witnessed the eventual saving face of ethanol from what appears to be a lack of data integrity and the traditional “yelling fire in a crowded theater” report release technique that has been used in the past to slow down the development of ethanol and other biofuels.  There have been, and will continue to be, many more issues that emerge about ethanol considering this is a fight for the $500 billion U.S. gasoline market.

In the past 30 years I have witnessed many other emerging issues evolve and be resolved:

• Automakers evolved from voiding warranties for using 10% ethanol blends to them becoming members of the Clean Fuels Development Coalition and encouraging the use of 85% ethanol blends in their six million flexible fuel vehicles in commercials on the Super Bowl.
• A government that has evolved from one that did not support the ethanol industry lawsuit against the oil industry for unfair trade practices case it had before the FTC because of the national “no alcohol in my gasoline” sign campaign during the 1980’s to a government that is protecting those same independent gasoline dealers from their suppliers as they try to sell E10 or E85 to meet the provisions in the new Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007.
• The evolution of thinking from “there will never be significant ethanol production” to “what are we going to do with the extra 4 billion gallons of new capacity this year.”
• And then there has always been the ongoing response and proof to the constant barrage of recycled anti-ethanol messages like negative energy balances, too much water use, food vs. fuel, and how ethanol is driving up the price of everything – but $100+ per barrel oil is not.
• And now...The Shot at Ethanol heard around the world -- land use.

Hopefully, the land use issue will emerge and submerge, and then be placed in the “put out to pasture” category.  I hope this link to the summary CFDC provided the media and Congress on land use and the following accumulation of responses and data will support the evolution of thinking – ethanol and biofuels are still better than oil.

"Two studies posted last week on ScienceExpress -- an advance web version of Science Magazine -- and widely reported in the press, raise important issues but often read like conclusions looking for an underlying rationale.  These two studies fundamentally misunderstand the local forces behind land use change issues and make no provision for mitigating impacts such as the slowdown in urbanization that a vibrant agricultural economy would bring.  Further, these two studies somewhat conflict with one another, with one supporting cellulosic ethanol and the other one opposing it, except if produced from waste." U.S. Department of Energy, Argonne National Lab, National Renewable Energy Lab, Oak Ridge National Lab, Pacific Northwest Lab, and the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

Michael Wang of Argonne's Transportation Technology R&D Center and Zia
Haq of the Department of Energy's Office of Biomass responded to the article by Searchinger et al. in the February 7, 2008, SciencExpress, "Use of U.S. Croplands for Biofuels Increases Greenhouse Gases through Emissions from Land Use Change" The eight-page response from the Department of Energy that claims many wrongful assumptions in the report that include ethanol production estimates, fertilizer use, exports, technology, corn yields, and land use in foreign countries – to name a few.

Todd Sneller, Administrator, Nebraska Ethanol Board and Chairman, Clean Fuels Development Coalition stated:

Numerous scientific studies have proved that ethanol fuels emit fewer greenhouse gas emissions than gasoline and create a net energy gain.  Several states are currently evaluating low carbon gasoline standards as a means of reducing greenhouse gases (GHG). Such standards may require that future gasoline blends reduce greenhouse gases by at least 20% over a conventional gasoline baseline. Greater use of ethanol in gasoline is considered the most economic means of reducing GHG emissions to required levels. A recent study at the University of Nebraska found that ethanol from switchgrass has 94% lower lifecycle GHG emissions than gasoline and creates a 540% net positive energy gain.

In their response to the study, The 25x25 Steering Committee reinforced the Nebraska study, that was published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, which also shows that along with the energy advances, switchgrass also offers significant environmental benefits, including many conservation uses the deep fibrous roots of the plant help to keep soil intact and virtually stop runoff.

Biotechnology Industry Organization (BIO) Executive Vice President, Industrial & Environmental Section, Brent Erickson released a statement about the short comings of the report.

"As outlined in a recent BIO report, "Achieving Sustainable Production of Agricultural Biomass for Biorefinery Feedstock," farmers will be able to produce, harvest and deliver sufficient feedstock to the growing biorefinery industry in an economically and environmentally sustainable way through increased use of no-till agriculture. The report identifies available techniques for sustainable harvesting of agricultural residues - such as corn stover and cereal straws - for use as feedstocks for advance biofuel biorefineries. "With agricultural biotechnology, farmers can continue to increase yields of crops to meet the demands for both food and fuel. Over the past 10 years, agricultural biotechnology has helped U.S. farmers increase yields by 30 percent, a rate of yield increase that will be sufficient to meet the goals of the new renewable fuel standard.

David Morris, Institute for Local Self-Reliance disputes conclusions of recent anti-ethanol land use studies in a study and press release.

"The studies usefully estimate how much carbon will be released when new land is brought into crop production," says David Morris, ILSR's Vice President and author of Ethanol and Land Use Changes. "But the authors' declarations that ethanol increases greenhouse gas emissions, a conclusion that has made headlines around the world, is not supported, and may be contradicted, by their own data." The report notes that the vast majority of today's ethanol production comes from corn cultivated on land that has been in corn production for generations.  "Since little new land has come into production, either directly or indirectly, the current use of ethanol clearly reduces greenhouse gas emissions," says Morris, who served six years on an Advisory Committee on biomass to the U.S. Departments of Energy and Agriculture. The studies fail to recognize the very low greenhouse gas emissions from advanced ethanol plants, plants that can reduce emissions by over 50 percent as compared to gasoline.  Nor do the studies factor in the higher greenhouse gases that will be emitted when crude oil is extracted from unconventional sources like tar sands. The full report, Ethanol and Land Use Changes

And let’s not forget about the alternative to biofuels and ask the age old question “biofuels compared to what? – oil.

As the ‘easy’ sources of oil decline, development of exotic resources, like tar sands in Canada, are being pursued. Tar sands, by comparison, release some 300 percent more greenhouse gas emissions than traditional petroleum recovery. Biofuels alone are not the silver bullet to the energy or environmental challenges our planet faces. But they do offer a pathway forward.   Statement of the Renewable Fuels Association

And we come full circle, as The American Coalition for Ethanol (ACE) believes the RFS needs to be adjusted, eliminating the "indirect land use" provision as published in Myke Feinman's, BioFuels Journal Editor Blog response.

History has proven time and time again that the continued development of biofuels, like ethanol, will help evolve science and help evolve some of our conventional thinking.