EPA: Today's Ethanol Isn't Good Enough

digg Share this on Facebook Huffpost - EPA: Today's Ethanol Isn't Good Enough stumble reddit del.ico.us RSS

H. JOSEF HEBERT | 05/ 5/09 05:37 PM | AP

I Like ItI Don’t Like It

WASHINGTON — The Obama administration renewed its commitment Tuesday to speed up investments in ethanol and other biofuels while seeking to deflect some environmentalists' claims that huge increases in corn ethanol use will hinder the fight against global warming.

President Barack Obama directed more loan guarantees and economic stimulus money for biofuels research and told the Agriculture Department to find ways to preserve biofuel industry jobs. The recession, as well as lower gasoline prices, has caused some ethanol producers to suffer, including some who have filed for bankruptcy.

Obama said an interagency group also would explore ways to get automakers to produce more cars that run on ethanol and to find ways to make available more ethanol fueling stations. "We must invest in a clean energy economy," Obama said in a statement.

The reassurances to the ethanol industry came as the Environmental Protection Agency made public its initial analysis on what impact the massive expansion of future ethanol use could have on climate change. Rejecting industry and agricultural interests' arguments, it said its rules _ which will take months to develop _ will take into account increased greenhouse gas emissions as more people plant ethanol crops at the expense of forests and other vegetation and land use is influenced worldwide by the demand for biofuels.

When Congress in 2007 required a huge increase in ethanol use _ to as much as 36 billion gallons a year by 2022 _ it also required that ethanol _ whether from corn or cellulosic crops like switchgrass or wood chips _ have less of a "lifecycle" impact on global warming than does gasoline. It set the threshold at 20 percent climate-pollution improvement for corn ethanol and 60 percent for cellulosic ethanol, although ethanol made from facilities already operating would be exempt.

EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson said the analysis shows corn ethanol emitting 16 percent less greenhouse gases than gasoline, even taking into account global future land-use changes.

But that's true in only one of the scenarios the EPA examined; another showed corn ethanol would account for 5 percent more greenhouse gases than gasoline. The scenario Jackson cited assumes future environmental benefits over a period of 100 years will more than pay back the initial increase in greenhouse gases from land-use changes; the second assumes a shorter payback period of 30 years.

Frank O'Donnell, president of the advocacy group Clean Air Watch, said the Obama administration was "walking a tightrope" to try to reconcile the expansion of corn ethanol with its determination to aggressively address climate change. He called the assumption of a 100-year ethanol payback to make up for early greenhouse emission increases "nothing but an accounting trick to make corn ethanol look better."

Story continues below
advertisement

But environmentalists also praised the EPA for making clear it will take into account worldwide land-use changes in assessing ethanol's climate impacts. "The devil is always in the details, but we're pleased that the EPA proposed rules that would require all global warming pollution from biofuels to be taken into account," said Kate McMahon of Friends of the Earth.

The ethanol industry and farm-state members of Congress had wanted only a comparison of direct emissions, which show ethanol as the clear winner, but welcomed the EPA's promise to examine the issue further.

"There is currently no scientific agreement or certainty to quantify domestically produced ethanol impacts on land-use change," argued Roger Johnson, president of the National Farmers Union, responding to the EPA assessment.

Sen. Tom Harkin, D-Iowa, said he was "skeptical about the science" about the indirect land-use impacts of ethanol on climate change, but that he is pleased the EPA "recognizes the need for a thorough analysis and review of this issue prior to any final decision." Jackson said that as the EPA develops its regulation it will seek out peer-reviewed scientific views on the issue and make its final determination "based on the best science available."

___

On the Net:

Environmental Protection Agency: http://www.epa.gov

Renewable Fuels Association: http://www.rfa.org

Agriculture Department: http://www.usda.gov

WASHINGTON — The Obama administration renewed its commitment Tuesday to speed up investments in ethanol and other biofuels while seeking to deflect some environmentalists' claims that huge incre...
WASHINGTON — The Obama administration renewed its commitment Tuesday to speed up investments in ethanol and other biofuels while seeking to deflect some environmentalists' claims that huge incre...
Report Corrections
 
Comments
16
Pending Comments
0
iPhone App Promo

Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to

View Comments:
- Mikeeee I'm a Fan of Mikeeee 70 fans permalink

Ethanol is a fraud.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:41 AM on 05/07/2009
- katooom I'm a Fan of katooom 19 fans permalink
photo

The ethanol king has no clothes. Somebody please stop the insanity. Ethanol is not the answer.
Besides all the thermodynamic efficiency problems - YOU CANNOT TRANSPORT ETHANOL BY PIPELINE!!! It absorbs water/mois­ture/conta­minates!

Do we really want thousands more tanker trucks on the roadways delivering ethanol?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:41 AM on 05/07/2009
- Photofarm I'm a Fan of Photofarm 21 fans permalink

The EPA is totally clueless about ethanol production, and especially corn ethanol. Land is not, nor will it have to be cleared for the production. They ignore the reality of decreased corn consumption in livestock, being replaced with distillers grains. They ignore increased efficiencies at the ethanol plants, where they are getting more ethanol per bushel of corn. They are using very outdated yield and energy costs of raising corn.

While ethanol is not going to replace all fuel for cars, it is part of the puzzle to provide local fuel instead of depending on imports. Ethanol last year kept the price of gasoline down 40-50 cents a gallon compared to what it would have been without ethanol.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:51 PM on 05/06/2009
- sc300nc I'm a Fan of sc300nc 55 fans permalink

Just another great example of how the Fed'l Gov't screws things up when they start meddling into the private sector. Ethanol has never been viable, has always and will always be a tax burden to us all. Give it up already.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:58 PM on 05/06/2009

Ethanol is plenty viable when it's derived from sugar cane.

But thanks to the corn lobby and a corrupt Congress we have high fructose corn syrup slowing poisoning us and hungry Mexicans and Latin Americans thanks to higher corn prices.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:40 PM on 05/06/2009
- TJCole I'm a Fan of TJCole 163 fans permalink
photo

We could easily be growing tons of Hemp 4 Fuel overnight Industrial Hemp , and not just Cellulose Ethanol but also we can get Bio Diesel from it's seeds as well...

It's ridiculous we are not pursuing this option which would create so many jobs Green Jobs, both growing and harvesting it but also distilling and refining it and it renews every 4 months...!

Also there is no need to grow it in rows so we can literally pack an acre full of it producing tons of bio mass...!

There is no good reasons for Industrial Hemp to be banned and it is at the cost of our energy independence and even national security that we still refuse to lift this out dated ill conceived ban..of Industrial Hemp, which is not marijuana and does not get anyone high, god forbid...

Here's Hemp 4 Fuel a great site lots of articles and scientific studies and see the Why Hemp section as well....

http://hemp4fuel.com/

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:01 PM on 05/06/2009
- Woggles I'm a Fan of Woggles 7 fans permalink

Yes, We should not raise any food crops, just fuel crops. We'll figure out what to eat later on. That's a great idea.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:52 PM on 05/06/2009
photo

Making fuel for Hummers out of food. Now thats what I call a good idea.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:02 PM on 05/06/2009
- econ1 I'm a Fan of econ1 5 fans permalink

Once started it is hard to correct government mandates. All the people getting subsidies for growing crops, building ethanol plants, driving the ethanol trucks from Iowa to CA etc. want to keep getting them.

Now Obama directs the government to "save biofuel jobs" because without the government they would not exist (at least until the science and technology are developed to the point where it makes some sense).

It would be great to have someone say, "hey, we made a mistake, go do something else until we correct it.). Not likely though.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:02 PM on 05/06/2009
- Lemmy I'm a Fan of Lemmy 19 fans permalink

Excellent post. Ethanol has been proven to be a total waste of money for the American taxpayer.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:43 PM on 05/06/2009

There's nothing wrong with ethanol, it's great and ultimately, everything should run on E85. The problem is ethanol grown from corn, which is unsustainable. In the publics mind, corn and ethanol are synonomous. If we could start getting ethanol from more efficient crops, or raw cellulose, then we could really make a positive impact on lifecycle issues.

Corn should be considered a bridge crop to something better.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:20 AM on 05/06/2009
- jordan3189 I'm a Fan of jordan3189 20 fans permalink

Funny, I don't remember hearing that argument when this whole fiasco started.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:35 AM on 05/06/2009

That is exactly the argument in the National Renewable Fuel Standard which caps the amount of corn ethanol at 14 billion gallons per year. The further increase to 36 billion gpy has to be from non-food renewable sources such as cellulose. Corn ethanol is a bridge to build the fuel infrastructure to accept something other than refined crude oil.
You can't remember what you never knew.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:24 PM on 05/06/2009

Why not grow the corn for people to eat. I imagine that many years from now the big problem is going to be lack of food. Corn is good food.

If we're going to develop biofuels, why not focus on algae and other more efficiently produced types like yeast and switchgrass? Good videos on alternative biofuels: http://www.dasolar.com/alternative-energy/biofuels

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:28 AM on 05/06/2009
- Mikeeee I'm a Fan of Mikeeee 70 fans permalink

Corn is not good food, please research it. I agree with you, that food crops should not be used as fuel or that food fields should be changed over to fuel crops. We need the food.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:43 AM on 05/07/2009
- PlayTOE I'm a Fan of PlayTOE 24 fans permalink
photo

Most ethanol use was a green-wash with massive government funding and subsidies.

Running cars on electricity is a far better option. We now have the technology, and only need mass production to bring down the prices.
(see Tesla S ... drive for 4 hours on the highway, and recharge in 45 minutes while having lunch & a pee break)

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:29 AM on 05/06/2009
Comments are closed for this entry

 You must be logged in to comment. Log in  or connect with 

Connect