The Ethanol Debate

Seems that we have  a choice. Corn for auto fuel or for food stuff.  It comes down to the cost of ethanol for cars or food. The cost may be too high for both.

 Because one gallon of ethanol contains 66 percent of the energy content of gasoline, 165 billion gallons of ethanol equates to 108 billion gallons of gasoline

The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) projects that distilleries will require only 60 million tons of corn from the 2008 harvest. But here at the Earth Policy Institute (EPI), we estimate that distilleries will need 139 million tons—more than twice as much. If the EPI estimate is at all close to the mark, the emerging competition between cars and people for grain will likely drive world grain prices to levels never seen before. The key questions are: How high will grain prices rise? When will the crunch come? And what will be the worldwide effect of rising food prices?  From an agricultural vantage point, the automotive demand for fuel is insatiable. The grain it takes to fill a 25-gallon tank with ethanol just once will feed one person for a whole year. Converting the entire U.S. grain harvest to ethanol would satisfy only 16 percent of U.S. auto fuel needs.

The competition for grain between the world’s 800 million motorists who want to maintain their mobility and its 2 billion poorest people who are simply trying to survive is emerging as an epic issue. Soaring food prices could lead to urban food riots in scores of lower-income countries that rely on grain imports, such as Indonesia, Egypt, Algeria, Nigeria, and Mexico. The resulting political instability could in turn disrupt global economic progress, directly affecting all countries. It is not only food prices that are at stake, but trends in the Nikkei Index and the Dow Jones Industrials as well.

 The cold reality is that for every additional one percent of gasoline replaced by ethanol, another one percent of land must be tilled.  Such expansion of tilled land would be an ecological disaster.  Biodiesel is even worse.  To replace just 10 percent of our diesel needs with biodiesel, we would have to increase America's land under tillage by 25 percent or 100,000,000 acres.

Pacific Ethanol reports troubles

March 19, 2008

The capitol company reveals heavy losses, cost overruns and liquidly crunch.

Sacramento's Pacific Ethanol Inc. reported heavy losses and a liquidity squeeze Tuesday, and said it has encountered millions in cost overruns on its ethanol plants.The company, once a highflier in the biofuels market, also said it is in default on its bank loans be­cause of bookkeeping problems

Sacramento's Pacific Ethanol Inc. reported heavy losses and a liquidity squeeze Tuesday, and said it has encountered millions in cost overruns on its ethanol plants. The company, once a highflier in the biofuels market, also said it is in default on its bank loans be­cause of bookkeeping problems

The company, once a highflier in the biofuels market, also said it is in default on its bank loans be­cause of bookkeeping problems.

My Comment: This is the project that Bill Gates put in 80 million dollars.

There are major problems with mandating more ethanol from either corn or cellulosic products:

• The demand for corn to make ethanol has driven prices up about 100% and since corn is used in many foods and to feed livestock, the price of food has risen. Soybean prices have skyrocketed, too, as corn production has displaced soybean planting.

•  There is currently no proven technology to produce cellulosic ethanol on a large scale.

•  It costs $2.50/gallon to produce cellulosic ethanol versus $1.50/gallon for corn ethanol. (John Kruse, analyst a Global Insight in Waltham, Mass.).

• There is debate on how much energy it takes to produce celllulosic ethanol — some analysts claim it takes 70 percent more energy to produce ethanol          from switchgrass than it yields;

•   Removal of agricultural waste from fields such as cornstalks to use in ethanol production could lead to environmental damage of the land and increased run-off.

•  Transporting grasses to refineries is costly.

•    Tax dollars to the tune of $358 million are being allocated to help defray the costs of building new cellulosic ethanol refineries.

•    Government subsidies are still needed to make ethanol viable.

•    Ethanol production adds to air and water pollution — towns in the Midwest are fighting construction of new plants because of the huge amount of water needed.

•     Ethanol adds more nitrous oxide to the air when burned than pure gasoline.

Cornell Professor David Pimentel chaired a US Department of Energy panel to investigate the energetics of ethanol production.

They found that "131,000 BTUs are needed to make 1 gallon of ethanol. One gallon of ethanol has an energy value of only 77,000 BTU. ... there is a net energy loss of 54,000 BTU [per gallon]." It is clear that ethanol will not prevent us from using Mid-east oil, it will increase it.

But there are other costs as well. Erosion of soils occurs 12 times as fast with corn growing as with other crops, and corn requires 25% more water.

Ignoring the minor matter of negative efficiency, Pimentel goes on to say, "If all the automobiles in the United States were fueled with 100 percent ethanol, a total of 97% of the U.S. land area would be needed to grow the corn feedstock."  Not too environmentally friendly is it?

Ethanol plants' large use of water degrades supplies
By Gretchen Randall

Date: October 18, 2007

Issue: An editorial in the Wall St. Journal (WSJ) says that four gallons of water are needed to produce one gallon of ethanol from corn, not considering the water used in irrigating corn in many states. The WSJ reports that many communities and even states are opposing new ethanol plants because of potential degradation of their water supply.  

Kansas is suing Nebraska over how much water can be taken from the Republican River; Jamestown, North Dakota defeated a proposal for a plant and opposition to ethanol plants is occurring in Wisconsin and Minnesota over the amount of water that would be used. (WSJ)

Other facts from the story:
€ "To replace just 10% of gasoline and diesel consumption, the U.S. would need to convert a full 43% of its cropland to ethanol production."

€  The alternative of cutting down more trees to plant corn would release more greenhouse gases than using gasoline because the trees that would be cut down "absorb more emissions that ethanol saves."
€ Oil is "up to 1,000 times more efficient than solar energy" and solar power is "roughly 10 times as efficient as biomass-derived fuels like ethanol."

Comment 1: It's unfortunate that Congress is now considering increasing the mandate on using biofuels such as ethanol without realizing the consequences it may have, not only in increased food prices, but on our water supply.

Comment 2: This reminds us of a previous government mandate to use MTBE in gasoline that resulted in tainted water supplies in cities and didn't reduce pollution.

Comment 3: Remember, this degradation of water supplies comes at taxpayer expense in the form of a 51-cent per gallon ethanol subsidy.

Link:  "Ethanol's Water Shortage" (subscription required) at: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB119258870811261613.html?mod=todays_us_opinion  

Contact: Gretchen Randall
Winningreen LLC
3712 N. Broadway – PMB 279
Chicago, IL 60613

Ethanol neither reduces green house gases nor relieves the US against foreign or domestic fuel consumption.

Ethanol use in the U.S. has seen  growth in recent years. But almost all ethanol produced in the U.S. today is from corn and the production process  takes a large amount of energy to process corn into ethanol. Most ethanol production facilities that are in operation or on the drawing boards consume natural gas to produce ethanol

Lets look further at ethanol as a energy source.

Ethanol made from sugar cane produces a higher yield, but sugarcane is not grown in the United States.  The truth about ethanol is it is subsidized in the US because it helps to elevate  the price of corn. No President of either party would curb subsidization of ethanol and still get elected. I would like to emphasize here that even though we will probably continue ethanol subsidies and require it be a gasoline additive, it is not a renewable that we can count on as a major energy source.

Many states require ethanol as a vehicle engine oxygenate. It is mixed with gasoline by about 10%. It is supposed to provide cleaner combustion. But this is a fabrication. In a study conducted by the Minnesota Center for Automotive Research, Minnesota State University, based on extensive testing of automotive engines with ethanol up to 30% mixture with gasoline there was no apparent trend in vehicle emissions identified. Some emission increased while others decreased. Also remember that on a volumetric basis, ethanol has only 53% of the energy content of gasoline. In other words ethanol drives up the cost of automotive fuel with no identifiable advantage in fuel emissions.

Ethanol demand to fuel vehicles increases the cost of food . It will especially cost the poor more to eat.

Doane Advisory Services notes that forecasts call for grain inventories to reach their lowest level in modern history by the end of this crop year. Grain production should reach a new all-time high this year at 1.66 trillion tons. (Drought conditions throughout much of the U.S. don't bode well for this forecast, by the way). Yet demand is growing faster, to about 1.68 trillion tons. In three of the last four years, demand has topped production and grain stocks have fallen.

Another big factor in all of this is the rush for biofuels – in particular, ethanol. Ethanol production should devour about one fifth of America's corn crop. The rush to plant corn is a great boon for fertilizer makers. Corn alone accounts for about 40% of U.S. fertilizer use. Plus, many farmers have dropped the standard corn-soybean crop rotation in favor of continuous corn planting,

The prices of all kinds of meat are up. So is the price for cereals – Kellogg's and General Mills have raised their prices. Orange juice, eggs, and milk – all up significantly. You see it perhaps most prominently in higher prices for corn and wheat. Wheat recently reached an 11-year high. Corn topped a 10-year mark last year.

Growing U.S. Ethanol Industry Still Mostly Speculative-Grade, Report Says

NEW YORK, June 8, 2006 /PRNewswire

Over the past year, ethanol industry fundamentals have improved dramatically, but it is uncertain whether this progress can be sustained, according to a report published today by Standard & Poor's Ratings Services titled "Ethanol Is Hot, But That Doesn't Ensure Stronger Ratings For U.S. Producers."

The U.S. ethanol industry is benefiting from increasing political support and ever-rising demand as gasoline prices soar along with those of oil. Also boosting the ethanol makers is the 51 cents-per-gallon tax credit granted to blenders and the need to rapidly replace the phased-out gasoline additive MTBE.

"Against this backdrop, we continue to analyze the credit quality of ethanol producers with our conservative assumptions and to continue to highlight fundamental risks that face industry players," said Standard & Poor's credit analyst Elif Acar.

The profitable ethanol market has resulted in rising capital costs and longer time to market -- factors that can in some cases more than offset the benefits of higher ethanol prices or new production facilities.

"As a result, we conclude that most projects and companies in the ethanol industry seeking ratings for long-term financing would continue to fall into the highly speculative-grade 'B' category," Acar said.

Ethanol Made from Cellulose

Ethanol can also be produced from "cellulose biomass" such as trees, leaves, various plant wastes, and grasses.

In his State of the Union address President  Bush raised the prospect of producing ethanol from waste material, which holds the potential for making it cost effective and reduce its environmental impact. Supporters say the president's goal is within reach.

"He said that in six years we want to have competitively priced ethanol from cellulose (waste plant material)," said Reid Detchon, executive director of the Energy Future Coalition, a bipartisan public policy group.

Breaking cellulose into sugar to spin straw into ethanol has been studies for at least 50 years. But the technological hurdles and costs have been so daunting that most ethanol producers have relied on heavy government subsidies to squeeze ethanol fuel from corn

The idea mentioned by Bush during his State of the Union speech — called "cellulose ethanol" — skirts that problem because it makes fuel from farm 'waste such as straw, corn stalks and other inedible agricul­tural leftovers. Cellulose is the woody stuff found in branches and stems that makes plants hard.

Environmentalists see big benefits to producing ethanol from waste material compared with grains such as corn.

"With this new technology, resources to produce ethanol would be much more widely available," said Daniel Lashof, a senior scientist at the Natural Resources Defense Council.

"What that involves is moving from small scale pilot projects to full scale commercial facilities. I might be a little more aggressive. Ethanol can make a large difference in the shorter term."

"With this new technology, resources to produce ethanol would be much more widely available," said Daniel Lashof, a senior scientist at the Natural Resources Defense Council.

My comments on this subject

• What! 50 years and no progress? It seems that there are many items that will come into being in 50 years such as fuel cells, fusion power, PV solar, etc.  Nuclear power is here now and is the answer to our energy supply problems.

• The process has not been developed and the ethanol yield from wastes such as wood, leaves, and switch grass, etc. is not known. It could be very small for the mass of input.

• Gathering this material from around the country side will be very laborious and bulky.

• Although the environmentalists say cellulose  does not need fertilizer, it does. The soil does not manufacture hydrogen. Ethanol made from corn requires fertilizer and corn Stover mass to produce corn. Consider that all of the ethanol produced requires the same material inputs. Where does this come from? Soil does not manufacture the input materials needed to produce ethanol. It took billions of years of compressing plant materials to make oil.

• Switch grass takes huge amount of land to grow a massive amount of material. Just do a mass balance to see where the material comes from to make  ethanol.  Does the soil have as much massive product as we get from  21 million barrels of gasoline per day? And the yield of ethanol is relatively  low so the mass of grass is enormous to harvest and process into ethanol. And it might not be feasible to do so.

• I believe a little common sense rules out biomass as a significant material to fuel Americas transportation system.

The Great Ethanol Debate Goes On

Currently we read almost daily that  non-corn waste such as switch grass will abundantly  and economically  be turned into ethanol to replace gasoline as our  vehicle fuel, especially  since the price per gallon of gasoline has gone past three dollars per gallon. But professors Pimentel and Patzek don't think so.

"There is no energy benefit to using plant biomass for liquid fuel" says David Pimentel, professor of ecology and agriculture at Cornell. These strategies  are not sustainable.

David Pimentel and Tad W. Patzek, professors at Cornel and Cal Berkeley University's respectively, conducted a detailed analysis of the energy input-yield ratios of producing ethanol from corn, switch grass and wood biomass as well as for producing biodiesel from soybean and sunflower plants. Their report is published in Natural Resources Research (Vol. 14:1, 65-76).

In terms of energy output compared with energy input for ethanol production, the study found that:

• corn requires 29 percent more fossil energy than the fuel produced;

• switch grass requires 45 percent more fossil energy than the fuel produced; and

• wood biomass requires 57 percent more fossil energy than the fuel produced.

In terms of energy output compared with the energy input for biodiesel production, the study found that:

• soybean plants requires 27 percent more fossil energy than the fuel produced, and

• sunflower plants requires 118 percent more fossil energy than the fuel produced.

 Infrastructure Issues

Water and power are critical infrastructure needs. Available water is an especially important consideration because the steps in biomass conversion deals with dilute streams, containing relatively small quantities of material in much larger volumes of water. It is estimated that approximately 500,000,000 gallons of water per year would be required to support a 20-mgpy ethanol plant. The long-term availability of water would need to be addressed for any plant in the study region.   (Info taken from Web Site  www.straightdope.com

It certainly would not be feasible to use copious amount of water in California.

Congress Gets Drunk on Ethanol. Corn + your tax dollars = a bad improvement

   The piece taken from a Web Site www.westbioenergy.org    by

Ronald Bailey

This Thanksgiving season, the American public is being treated to the spectacle of the Federal government, both the executive and legislative branches, going on a spending binge the likes of which has not been seen in decades. Even the Washington Post's editorial page is horrified at the double digit increases in "discretionary" federal spending. But rather than take on the whole horror, let's just look at one small but telling example of "pork" spending: the subsidies for the production of ethanol from corn that are salted away in the new 1,100 page energy bill. The bill mandates a doubling of the production of ethanol fuel made from corn. Current ethanol subsidies total around $1.4 billion annually. As Illinois Senator Everett Dirksen famously quipped: "A billion here, a billion there, and pretty soon you're talking real money."

The new subsidies to produce ethanol from corn are a classic example of "log-rolling." They are designed to bribe important Democratic lawmakers into voting for the whole energy bill. And it's apparently working—Senator Thomas Daschle (D-SD) and Senator Byron Dorgan (D-ND), both of whom hail from corn producing states, say they will vote for it. But perhaps one can make the case that ethanol is a good deal for the economy and the environment? After all ethanol is a "renewable fuel" that displaces oil imported from the unstable Middle East and helps clear the air.

The last statement is meant as a farce since production of ethanol does not offer a net gain in energy.

Ethanol is eating your lunch.

Today's Chicago Sun-Times reports that food prices rose nationally 3.9% in April over a year ago with Los Angeles seeing even a higher increase of 5.7%. (This would equal well over 50 percent if compounded for the year.)

Experts are quoted as saying that the high price for corn used in ethanol is helping push food prices higher. Higher fuel prices which add to the cost of transporting food to the stores also account for part of the hike in food prices.

Pat Jackman, an economist with the Bureau of Labor Statistics, is quoted in the story saying, "You have to go back a long time in order to find a period in which grocery store prices were rising more rapidly than they are now."

Apparently people do not want ethanol plants in their cities

The Wall Street Journal (WSJ) reported last week that a proposed new ethanol plant 40 miles outside Madison, Wisconsin has encountered opposition from many residents who don't want the plant built in their town because of the heavy truck traffic it will bring, the very sweet odor that emanates from the production of ethanol and most importantly, the possible depletion of aquifers because of the amount of water needed in production. Other plants in Indiana, Illinois, Missouri, Nebraska and Kansas reportedly also face opposition from residents.

Opponents of a plant in Webster County, Missouri claim the proposed plant near Mt. Vernon, Missouri would use more water than the entire 33,000 citizens of the county. Countries such as Indonesia, Malaysia and even Canada are seeing forests disappear so crops can be grown for alternative fuels.  WSJ reports that environmentalists in India "say water tables are dropping as farmers boost production of ethanol-yielding sugar."

Corn ethanol and soybean biodiesel studied

MINNEAPOLIS, Jul 11, 2006 -- UPI

The first comprehensive U.S. analysis of the life cycles of soybean biodiesel and corn grain ethanol shows biodiesel performs better than corn ethanol.

The University of Minnesota study suggests soybean biodiesel has much less of an impact on the environment and a much higher net energy benefit than does corn ethanol, but neither can do much to meet U.S. energy demand.

Governor Rendell’s Energy Independence Strategy Will Save Consumers $10 Billion Over 10 Years And Reduce Our Reliance On Foreign Fuels

 Citing the urgent need to cut energy costs, move toward energy independence and stimulate the economy, Governor Rendell released his Energy Independence Strategy. The plan will push Pennsylvania into the top tier of states taking steps to cut consumer energy costs, and significantly expand the alternative fuel, clean energy and conservation sectors.  

 “This plan will cut Pennsylvanians’ energy bills by $10 billion over the next 10 years,” said Governor Rendell. “It will give us the ability to produce enough homegrown fuel to replace every gallon Pennsylvania currently imports from the Persian Gulf.”  Emphases added,

My Comment: Well this is a new one. Pennsylvania is not a really big farm state, but it will produce enough corn, soy beans, and cooking grease to supplant all of their imported gasoline. No other state has come close to this. The governor will see how easy it is to make productions and how difficult it is to carry these out.    After he is out of office in ten years  we will hear the same nonsense from the new governor in about 10 years.  Go back to California's Gov Jerry Brown's predications  20 yeas ago and see the same story.

At least the current California Gov Schwarzenegger has called for a reduction of 20% for gasoline usage, and they  have not a clue as to how this will be accomplished.

Cornell ecologist's study finds that producing ethanol and biodiesel from corn and other crops is not worth the energy