The Iowa State Fair, America's Energy Future: Better Over a Bushel Than Over a Barrel

Earlier this August, while Iowa was overrun with presidential hopefuls, I had occasion to visit Iowa's wonderful state fair, free to wander without any political obligos nor agenda. The fair was a wonderful experience, vesting each visitor with a sense of the best of Americana. What impressed me enormously was the enthusiasm, confidence and pride so palpably apparent among Iowans in their emerging role as major players in the nation's energy agenda. It was a theme that permeated the fair, a sense that the heartland of America would once again guide its destiny. It was exciting to experience a corner of this nation, once more so confident about its future.

Incumbent with the important role Iowa will be playing in renewable energy, its responsibility toward helping forge a broad-based national energy policy is not inconsequential, especially in that here is a constituency not wedded to oil interests. And particularly so, given the contribution Iowans will be making toward the nation's supply of alternative fuels.

It is on the demand side of the equation where national leadership is lacking. Certainly one of the most effective and immediate ways to break our "oil addiction" is to legislate a cap on the nation's gasoline consumption and to fairly distribute the available gasoline through a rationing or a voucher distribution program (see post "Capping America's Gasoline Consumption Through a Manageable 'Eco-Fuels Program" - 01.08.07). In spite of its many attributes given the manifold dynamic of our looming energy crisis, one can fairly ask who among the myriad of presidential hopefuls jousting through Iowa these past weeks even uttered, let alone permitted, the words "gasoline rationing" to pass their lips. Such is its perception by mainstream politicians and much of the media as being unthinkable policy, and politically anathema. Yet times, they are a-changing! America's public may be well ahead of our politicians in comprehending that a sea change in direction is now imperative.

Consider the benefits of a gas rationing or voucher distribution program:

• Reduce our CO2 emissions in a truly significant way in that the cap would be applied to petroleum-based carbon polluting gasoline, while consumption of non- or minimally-polluting fuels such as ethanol, biofuels, biomass, plug-in electric, hydrogen would be open-ended and priced to market
• Enhance our national security and reduce our dependence on foreign suppliers
• Pressure the price of oil (the core reason the oil industry is so against the concept) with all its positive national security and economic implications
• Bring about a renewal of our automobile industry by encouraging demand for flex fuel, hybrid, plug-in vehicles. We have over 230 million cars on the road of which only six million have flex fuel capability (government programs to help Americans make the changeover need be codified)
• Result in a boom to our farm belt whereby the billions we are sending to malign foreign regimes would now stay at home
• Create new jobs, as our economy is forced to focus on clean renewable energy sources, be it biofuel, biomass, wind, geothermal, nuclear, solar power, along with a wave of new and imaginative technological and agricultural innovations
• The economic benefits from gearing up and developing a national distribution system permitting access to biofuels and plug-in facilities throughout the land. We have 160,000 filling stations and only 1,002 with ethanol/biofuel capability
• Renewed interest and investment in our mass transportation system, especially our passenger rail service
• Becoming once again a nation respected for its moral authority, in that we, the world's most gluttonous oil consumer, will have freely assumed the mantle of conservation leadership

Oil rationing during WWII brought a shared sense of mission, sacrifice and dignity to the home front. Neither Iowans, nor the rest of America, fought and won that war to now lose our future to the unfettered consumption of fossil fuels. It is no longer tenable to simply give lip service solutions to the existential dangers of climate change threatening the only planet we have. The time for procrastination is past.

Given Iowa's stake in our energy future, given their independence from oil industry interests and much of its influence, perhaps now is time for Iowans to show the way toward bringing about real change. If indeed curtailing gasoline demand through gas rationing has traction, then let Iowa take the lead in bringing this important issue to the national table. Better over a bushel than over a barrel!

(Please note that with my post "The Energy Solution That Dares Not Speak Its Name", 07.17.07, some of the issues of this post were touched upon, but not with the same specificity. Therefore please excuse the overlap. Will not blog on this issue for at least a week.)

Comments

[Biofuelsimon]

Of course the US is a net importer of fertilizers, so you'd still have some overseas dependency. Why not lower your tariff barriers to zero for ethanol and allow third world producers access to the market than continue to subsidise expensive corn to ethanol production in Iowa and the rest of the midwest....
T

[realitytrumpsbull]

Furthermore, what about hydrogen power? And then, there's other pieces to the energy puzzle, how about a national car-care forum,
local garages could sponsor teach-ins for motorists, state DMV offices could put up a how-to pamphlet to encourage energy-efficient driving, slow down 5MPH and don't tailgate or dynamite the brakes/mash the gas pedal, and you can save 2-3 gallons easy. Past that it's some engine maintenance, choice of car, stuff like that. Where there's a will, there's a way, and a honda civic burns a lot less fuel than a full-size chrysler, and there's lots of ways to make ethanol, for that matter. Learn how to shift a manual transmission, save 50 bucks a month on fuel compared to an automatic, and buy a car from the start that has less accessory crap built into it that drags on the alternator. Gimme a bare-bones inline-6 pickup truck with no A/C in it, a manual trans, good aligned tires, and I'll achieve better mileage with a fully loaded truck than those stupid useless SUV's you see all over the place when they're empty. If you need all the comforts of your living room all the time, stay home and telework etc. That's another thing: A parked car consumes no fuel. Nuff said.

[realitytrumpsbull]

We have 3 pieces of shoreline, no waiting. Wind and solar power...

[topcat71]

Gas rationing would be a terrible response to the issue. What about all the people that have to commute to work? Personally I have a 35 mile one way trip. There is no public transportation, and the available urban housing could not obsorb the multitudes that live outside the inner city. All it would do is create a black market for the rationing tickets. The rich would consume as much as they pleased and the workers would get the shaft.
Corn is not the answer either. This is nothing more than ADM working the back door to get yet another big cash cow from the US Government.
Natrual field grasses are a better response.
http://environment.newscientist.com/channel/earth/dn10759-humble-grasses-may-be-the-best-source-of-biofuel-.html

[pvernier]

How much of the oil we import is refined into gasoline? And, how much more oil would be needed to make the fertilizers to grow all this corn.

How about a carbon tax on everyone, business and Humvee owners alike.

We are going to continue to use oil until something cheaper comes along. Which will be a long way out.

[dromedaddog]

As an Iowan, I have to ask the author - are you frigging nuts? A gasoline rationing plan that is meant to encourage corn-based ethanol production here in my state?

Various universities (Cornell and U. of Minn. included) have demonstrated that corn-based ethanol production is a net energy loser! The energy inputs for tilling, planting, fertilizing, harvesting, processing corn into ethanol, and then shipping ethanol exceed the energy gained by its production.

On top of that, the ethanol craze has almost doubled the cost of one of America's, and the world's, basic foodstuffs: corn. From corn syrup to taco shells to Corn flakes, your food prices have and will continue to increase as more corn is turned into ethanol instead of food.

If it were not for the government energy subsidies and mandates for ethanol to replace MTBE in gasoline mixtures, you wouldn't be reading this article because without those subsidies ethanol would be a money loser.

Of course, Iowa farmer's are happy about the price of a bushel of corn doubling over the past two years. But the ones really raking in the cash (as usual) are the giant food monopolies (Con-Agra, Archer-Daniels-Midland, Cargil).

If you really want to increase our energy independence, forget rationing and/or ethanol from CORN. First, increase gasoline mileage standards by 20% or better (easy to do). Second, produce ethanol from SWITCHGRASS like Brazil has been doing for years! And third, try producing methanol from woody stalk biomass via biologic processes, not distillation.

Links backing my arguements:
http://www1.umn.edu/umnnews/Feature_Stories/Ethanol_fuel_presents_a_cornundrum.html
http://www.news.cornell.edu/stories/July05/ethanol.toocostly.ssl.html
http://www.agriculture.state.ia.us/historic.html
http://www.ls9.com/aboutus.htm

Lastly, did the Author notice the large Wind Turbine installed by Mid-American Energy at Iowa State Fair on his visit? Iowa's real pride is being the 3rd largest generator of wind turbine power in the nation. As one of the windiest States in the Union, Iowa should focus on further developing that valuable resource.

[CelticMajic]

Gosh, once again we forgot we live in a capitalist society. Market forces will do just fine. Socialism has not and will not work!

[oldpotsmuggler]

Once again you forget that the "law of supply and demand" is nothing more than a quaint rule of thumb. And always will be as long as it is commonly cheaper to buy the competition that to compete aginst them.

Once you get OPEC to agree that "market forces will do just fine", come back here and argue it again.

[January]

Rationing would declare that oil is a diminishing resource. It would cause many life changes to happen before we crash and burn from them. It would turn chaos into a major but orderly problem.

How many times did Big Oil tell voters that adding a tax, beginning back when gasoline was 57 cents a gallon, to build new highways and do research on extending mileage, etc. would hurt the economy? I'm tired of that argument. Consumption hasn't gone down with gas at $3 a gallon. All that has happened is that the huge increase in price has now gone into Big Oil's pockets, because voters bought into their bogus argument.

Gas rationing takes leadership. We don't have any leadership because our voters are dumb enough to elect a Bush, who could care less what voters think or need. But at least let's not fool ourselves that there are no solutions. We have solutions but don't have the courage to put them in place.

[johnnyjust]

Ethanol is not mathematically practical.

There's not enough land in the world to grow the corn needed to produce the fuel used every year.

[GreedyOldPsychopaths]

Nor is it clean. More energy from fossil fuel sources is consumed in ethanol production than produced when ethanol is consumed. As a majority of the energy from our nation's electric grid is produced from coal sources, we can anticipate additional CO2 being released for the production of ethanol.

Pound-for-pound, burning coal releases more CO2 than other fossil fuels. Coal is basically carbon . Carbon has a lower atomic weight than oxygen. Thus, burning coal actually releases, by weight, more CO2 than the original coal!

Ethanol might make us more independent from oil, but unless we generate cleaner electricity, we are trading one dirty energy source for another.

[oldpotsmuggler]

THURSDAY, MAY 10, 2007
GAS RATIONING
Amending CAFE seems to be a bit timid, given the magnitude of the challenge. Or maybe we just suck at the whole "sacrifice" thing. Along with reducing CO2 emissions, decreasing energy consumption is actually a more effective tactic in the "War on Terror" than military action in Iraq is.

It"s clear that we need to impose BACT standards across the entire spectrum of the commercial component of our economy. Forcing them to go both clean and lean is too mush dislocation at one time, and we"ll get the best bang for our buck by focusing on the emissions side of the equation.

On the consumer side, I would advocate going to fuel rationing, among other things. Compute how much petroleum we want to consume, shoot for really the bare minimum possible, and then divide the number by the number of bodies or households, etc. in the country and issue coupons. That way if I want to drive my 5 MPG motor home badly enough to pay for a year of health insurance for a "working poor" family, and they want that badly enough to use the bus, we can make any deals we want between ourselves.

Anyway, something like that.

Any other suggestions?
POSTED BY OLDPOTSMUGGLER AT 10:01 AM

[Merlin7]

I can't think of a better way to make gasoline prices skyrocket -- along with food prices and prices in general -- than to ration gasoline and use large amounts of corn in a biofuels scheme.

I wonder if this idea was first dreamed up in a cooperative effort by Exxon and Archer-Daniels Midland. God help us -- if my fellow atheists will pardon the expression.