Don't mess with corn

Corn helps fuel American politics

Not long ago CARB set in place the California Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS), a standard that would significantly impact the use of much corn ethanol, not just in the California, but in the US.

Now, the research on corn ethanol has often been contradictory, but there has been plenty of independent, objective research that has produced some very unpleasant findings with corn ethanol and its impact on the environment.

Nonetheless, many have embraced corn ethanol as a path to cellulosic ethanol, an approach with some merit. Still, cellulosic ethanol cannot be an excuse for increased corn ethanol, especially ethanol with little benefit to the environment. Ultimately, if ethanol cannot move beyond corn, its time to start thinking beyond ethanol.

Can California, however, take such a stance? The courts are now going to decide that if two ethanol lobbying groups have their way (more).

Maybe cellulosic ethanol is for real?

But corn cob as feed?

Just finished an interesting piece on POET's advances in cellulosic ethanol. In a nutshell production costs have dropped from $4.13 to $2.35, but POET believes they can be further reduced to $2.00 per gallon when commercial production begins.

That's not bad compared to today's gasoline prices. Still, how much feedstock is available for such an application when it is still very corn-intensive? If corn demand goes up, won't these prices eventually go up?

MicroFuelers help make ethanol more sensible?

Keep it local

I've been following the ethanol micro fueling industry from a distance for the last year or so. These portable ethanol micro refineries are not cheap, at least $10,000 for a quality system, so they really don't make sense for home use.

Lately, however, lots of breweries are using spent yeast to create ethanol, and I think that's a great idea, especially if much of that ethanol is used at the business. For instance, all company vehicles should be running on the fuel created from the business's waste.

These types of closed loops, it seems to me, are the ideal course for ethanol and biofuels to take these days. Keep it local and close as many efficiency loops as possible.

What do you think? Should the government temper it's biofuel approach away from national goals towards regional goals?

Is Obama too corny to be green?

All cars must be flex fuel capable?

Today, E85 ethanol pumps are only available at 2 percent of all gas stations. Thus, most flex fuel vehicles have never used E85. The biggest advantage of flex fuel vehicles is that they help US automakers sell more gas guzzlers because of the CAFE credits provided to flex fuel vehicles.

Even worse, today's corn-based ethanol is not good for the environment, and it probably takes as much energy - if not more - to produce ethanol as it provides. Moreover, it doesn't burn efficiently and it's very corrosive.

Yet, because the corn lobby is so powerful, ethanol still is an important part of American politics, and President Barack Obama has been a corn lobby patsy for years.

But, you ain't seen nothing yet.

The Obama administration is now considering a move that would require all vehicles to be flex fuel vehicles, at a cost of at least $1 billion per year.

Isn't it time to put corn in check?

Not long ago President Obama vowed to take the back door politics out of mainstream politics. Well, here's your chance Mr. President. Do the right thing, not the politically expedient thing. Corn simply is not green, regardless of how many greenbacks Illinois corn farmers might provide for your re-election bid.

Cheap, organic gasoline?

An ethanol killer?

Terrabon believes it can turn a Texas A&M University pioneered fermentation process called MixAlco into cheap gasoline. Using almost any organic material, Terrabon believes it can produce gasoline at a price of $1.75 per gallon that behaves just like gasoline, leaving Terrabon's fuel far less corrosive and more efficient than ethanol.

Obama's Ag Sec. shows ethanol's importance to new administration

The king of corn?

Energy security has been an important part of President-Elect Obama's agenda. As a Senator in Illinois, Obama was a strong ethanol supporter, despite the many negative environmental criticisms of corn-based ethanol. Thus, his pick of Tom Vilsack, a huge corn-based ethanol supporter, seems to indicate that ethanol will continue to play a critical role in Obama's energy policy.

I've been pretty enthused by Obama's Elect days and many of his cabinet picks, but I do find Obama's support of corn-based ethanol alarming. A tempered approach to corn-based ethanol is supportable as a path to cellulosic ethanol, but I doubt Vilsack will support anything but an increase in the production and use of corn-based ethanol.

Ethanol consolidation coming

Green ethanol plays

Poet LLC, the nation's top ethanol producer, is now in buyout talks with a number of ethanol companies, such as VeraSun, and a number of other ethanol players. With many ethanol players suffering serious economic woes, Poet seems primed to grow with consolidation. And, with an ethanol supporter headed to the White House, it seems ethanol will remain an important part of the Nation's energy paradigm.

While we're not sure that ethanol counts as a green investment, we can only hope than any corn-based ethanol success leads to cellulosic ethanol R&D.

Q Microbe drawing cellulosic ethanol investment

Qteros' microbial hopes

Qteros picked up $25 million Series B funding today, reports CNET, led by investors like BP and George Soros.

The Q Microbe is a naturally occurring micro-organism that, according to Qteros, can efficiently turn cellulosic materials into ethanol - eliminating the need for enzymes which account for 30 percent of production costs.

Now, that's a green investment, literally.

Recession hurting cellulosic ethanol

Ethanol's promise fading?

"Because of the upheaval in the capital markets," CNET is reporting that "Mascoma cannot go public to raise additional funds, and institutional investors are being more cautious now. So the company is positioning itself to hold on to cash as long as possible."

Thus, the company is laying off employees.

Unfortunately, Mascoma is one of the few well-funded cellulosic ethanol companies out there, and if cellulose is the future of biofuels, the future of biofuels isn't looking too promising.

Archer Daniels a good green investment?

If you consider ethanol green?

Jim Cramer picked Archer Daniels Midland as a green investment that will do well under an Obama White House. Like Cramer, however, I'm not sure how green of an investment is ethanol. Still, if you are seeking a biofuel investment, then Cramer says ADM is a huge buy. Because it is large and worldwide, ADM is less affected by volatile corn prices. And, it's bioplastics business has huge potential.

America's corn economy unsustainable

America's fast food culture also driven by corn

Go to any one of America's fast food restaurants and your burger or chicken sandwich almost certainly comes from an animal that was predominantly corn fed.

"The trend over the past few decades has been to push for cheap animal protein," says Vicki Hird of environmental campaign group Friends of the Earth. She notes that government subsidies that favour corn have encouraged pesticide- and fertiliser-intensive monoculture farming in the US. "We are using corn in ways that are completely unsustainable," says Hird in the New Scientist.

Yet, as ethanol has grown, there has been a push for soy based feed for animals. Unfortunately, this soy is coming from Brazil, and it comes at the expense of the deforestation of rain forests that constitute one of the world's last clean air recyclers.

Will America ever stop being so corny?

What does VeraSun Energy say about corn ethanol?

Hedging on weather

When CNBC reported that VeraSun Energy was filing for bankruptcy yesterday, I knew it meant something bad for corn-based ethanol.

Turns out that VeraSun made some bad hedges on corn. Flooding in the Midwest caused corn prices to rise significantly, only to drop more than 50 percent, and VeraSun simply made the wrong bet. Yet, this is probably a bet that will have to be made again and again in the future.

Just shows how much the weather can have an impact on ethanol, especially corn-based ethanol. With future weather predictions looking much more volatile, how safe of a bet will corn be in the future?

Corn ethanol not so bad?

Much better than gasoline

A few new studies by the Illinois Corn Growers Association - obviously an unbiased source - suggest that many complaints about corn-based ethanol are unfounded. According to GCC the reports "conclude that the production of corn ethanol results in a smaller lifecycle carbon footprint than that of gasoline—significantly so in some cases. The reports also conclude that ongoing improvements in crop yield and more efficient production technologies will continue to improve the carbon profile of the biofuel, while also allowing room for expansion without impact on food or feed supplies."

I don't want to jump to conclusions, but the Illinois Corn Growers Association? Sort of reminds me of all the Wall Street execs, just before the financial collapse, claiming that the US financial system and their companies were in perfect shape.

Home brewed ethanol better than corn?

Time for something less corny?

E-Fuel Corp is offering a new microfueler that will cost about $7,000 after a rebate. It can produce about 5 gallons of ethanol per day, using 10-14 pds of sugar per gallon of ethanol. Does this make any sense, or does it prove that ethanol just isn't as sweet as it once sounded?

Congressional "momentum" building against ethanol

Hope for less corny politics?

I just finished watching Republican Texas Senator Kay Bailey Hutchinson talk to CNBC regarding her quest to "freeze the nation's biofuel mandate." While she admitted that such a "freeze" probably isn't popular enough in Congress yet to happen, there is "momentum" building against corn-based ethanol.

I won't held my breath just yet.

Biofuels: Who is lying on ethanol?

Is big oil really paying off all of ethanol's critics?

Corn-based ethanol has been under attack from every angle imaginable for the last few years. Water, runoff, pesticides, fertilizers, food prices and more have all been utilized by numerous academics throughout not just the US, but the world, as evidence of corn's dark side.

Yet, there are some in the US auto industry, as well as in Congress, that call all of these criticisms 'fabrications' funded by big oil.

In terms of food prices, for example, corn supporters claim that wheat and rice are to blame, not corn. Moreover, drought and other natural problems are also at fault.

Certainly, other factors are involved in the world's grain shortage. Still, if you grow less wheat and rice to grow more corn, isn't corn then part of the problem? Likewise, if the world is heading into a time of greater-than-normal drought, is it really a good idea to use food to power our energy guzzling vehicles?

Corn-based ethanol might not be as-guilty-as-charged, but it's far from innocent, and those that refuse every criticism of corn are starting to look like typical, pork-beholden politicians and self-interested corporatists - and every bit as evil as those in big oil.

Ethanol causing deforestation in Amazon

The result of 'green' ethanol?

So, corn-based ethanol is driving food prices higher, sucking up lakes of clean water, poisoning groundwater, streams and rivers as it creates a dead zone in the lower Mississippi and Gulf of Mexico region, while stealing inches of some of the best soil in the world. As if that wasn't enough, corn-based ethanol is also causing deforestation in the the Amazon.

Good thing Congress is pumping tens of billions of dollars into corn based ethanol over the next few years.

Toyota buying into cellulosic ethanol?

Hybrids and ethanol: The future according to Toyota?

According to the GreenCarJournal, a significant part of Toyota's plans for a sustainable future includes hybrid cars. While that might not be surprising, Toyota's focus on cellulosic ethanol, however, is a bit more unexpected.

"In the area of energy research, he noted, Toyota has begun development of cellulosic ethanol."

"Toyota recently selected four plants in various regions to be models for the sustainable plant concept announced earlier this year. The sustainable plants are designed to offer “ground-breaking environmental performance” to use renewable energy; and to contribute to the local community and environment."

Liars: CAFE to save Americans $700 per year?

Democrats in Congress are liars

"Democrats said the fuel economy requirements eventually -- when the fleet of gas-miser vehicles are widely on the road -- will save motorists $700 to $1,000 a year in fuel costs. They maintain the overall bill, including more ethanol use and various efficiency requirements and incentives, will reduce U.S. oil demand by 4 million barrels a day by 2030, more than twice the daily imports from the volatile Persian Gulf." (CNN)

Nonsense.

First, how is someone in an SUV going to save $700 per year if their vehicle is going to cost $7,000 more to buy? Americans might be able to buy more fuel efficient vehicles that will save fuel, but they are going to pay more for those vehicles. Does Congress not even understand economics 101? Read more....

Weather: An ethanol nightmare

Milk prices up 90 cents per gallon

Thanks to ethanol, food prices have jumped 5 percent because the costs of all grains continue to increase as more land is dedicated to fuel-based grains. Some products, such as milk, have gone up far higher thanks to ethanol.

However, according to an analyst on CNBC, the problems could get far worse and shortages are just one bad storm or drought away. So, considering the dry weather the US has seen increasing the last few years, why is America considering significantly increasing the use of corn-based ethanol?

There are just too many potential downsides to corn-based ethanol, and some of those downsides are potentially catastrophic. So, why is Congress so out of touch?

Ethanol lobby pushes to increase blend

Could it get any cornier?

"With ethanol production threatening to grow faster than existing automobiles and service stations can absorb it, ethanol advocates began a push Wednesday to allow ordinary cars to run on blends of 20 or 30 percent ethanol, compared with 10 percent today."

Sounds like pork-barrel, I mean corn-barrel legislation.

Cornholed: Congress and Renewable Fuels

Corn is a major political force

"NGVAmerica is concerned that one of the major provisions of the bill will not be able to achieve its goal of displacing 36 billion gallons of foreign oil. The Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) would require the use of 36 billion gallons of renewable fuel to power vehicles by 2022. By statute and physical production limitations, corn-based ethanol would be capped at 15 billion gallons per year. Physical production constraints also would limit soy-based biodiesel to no more than 3 billion gallons per year. It is envisioned that the rest – 18 billion gallons – would be produced from cellulosic biofuels. Today, there are no commercial-scale cellulosic biofuels plants operating in the U.S., and it is unrealistic to assume that an industry that could produce 18 billion gallons of fuel per year could develop in just the next 15 years. The House, realizing this, included waivers in their bill to lower the oil displacement goal, if necessary."

While I'm not a huge advocate of the natural gas movement, I think they point out some great problems - more problems - with the energy bill that the House has sent to the Senate.

Speaking of corny ethanol

Time to get real about ethanol

Just as I was making a post about CAFE and its ethanol loophole, an executive from Heinz was on CNBC discussing how corn-to-ethanol is going to keep pushing the price of food higher.

No surprise there, but as I was watching this CNBC segment I was also scrolling through the GreenCarCongress website and read an article that claims corn stover biomass - a key ingredient for many cellulosic ethanol plans - is misunderstood. It turns out that corn stover is not waste - as the industry has claimed - in fact it helps add nutrients to soil, prevents run-off, and helps control water.

Thus, even the holy grail of ethanol, cellulosic ethanol, will lead to wasted water, lost soil, greater chemical fertilizers and pesticides, etc. AWESOME!!!

Yes, there are other forms of biomass, but still, isn't it time for Congress to get its head out of its cornhole already? What a bunch of dipshits. Perhaps the term pork barrel legislation needs to be changed to corn barrel legislation.

Ethanol pushes turkey prices 11 percent higher

Get ready to pay more this year

Because corn comprises 60 percent of turkey feed, expect turkey prices to be 11 percent higher than last year thanks to corn-based ethanol according to a Power Lunch report by CNBC's Jane Wells.

Not all is bad news on the turkey front. Sales of free range and organic turkeys are on the rise.

Ethanol: Proof that Obama is a pork-loving politician pretending to be different?

Obama rips automakers, yet protects corn-based ethanol

Barack Obama loves corn-based ethanol, and the Presidential candidate is pushing a significant increase in ethanol production. And what's not to love about corn-based ethanol?

Corn-based ethanol received some $8 billion dollars worth of subsidies in 2006 - a politician's pork barrel wet dream.

But it's helping the planet, right? (Finish)

Biofuels to "greatly increase pressure on water"

More harm than good?

Grain based bio fuels - crops grown specifically for bio fuels - continue to draw red flags from the scientific community. Inevitably, fuels driven from grains, such as corn ethanol, are polluting groundwater, lakes, rivers and streams with fertilizer and pesticide runoff resulting in dead zones, such as in the Mississippi River basin and the Gulf of Mexico.

Aside from destroying water resources, a significant increase in such bio fuels could also "greatly increase pressure on water resources" in many parts of the U.S. - greatly diminishing an already scarce resource (more).

Can corn ethanol really be a good idea when so many have already predicted the ever growing importance of water in the very near future?

Isn't it time to end grain based bio fuels? Shouldn't all of our bio fuel efforts be focused on waste driven bio fuels, especially waste-driven cellulosic ethanol?

BlueFire: An example of a good ethanol subsidy?

Better than corn-based ethanol subsidies?

"The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) and BlueFire Ethanol Fuels, Inc. (OTC BB:BFRE.OB - News) today announced a cooperative agreement, which plays a critical role in bringing cellulosic ethanol to market.

The agreement provides BlueFire with the first of two stages of the Grant funding (totaling $40 million) for its second U.S. commercial ethanol production facility located in California. This facility was designated to demonstrate the economic feasibility and environmental superiority of producing cellulosic ethanol from post-sorted green waste and other cellulosic materials."

Isn't this a better way for the government to support the biofuels industry? Quite simply, corn-based ethanol is just not a good solution. In fact, it's just not a good idea at all.

Could ethanol destroy craft breweries?

Get ready to pay more for your favorite craft beer?

"Consumers could pay 50 cents to $1 per six pack more in the coming months for many small-batch "craft beers," as brewers pass on rising hops and barley costs from an unpalatable brew of poor harvests, the weak dollar and farmers' shift to more profitable crops."

The cost pressures could slow the expansion of American craft brewers, which account for about 5% of U.S. beer revenue, and even put some smaller ones out of business. Craft-beer makers also are battling other cost increases, including higher prices for glass, cardboard, gasoline and the stainless steel used to make beer kegs. "People are very concerned," says Kim Jordan, co-founder of Colorado's New Belgium Brewing Co., which makes Fat Tire Amber Ale, a top-selling craft beer. "It significantly affects profitability."

Good beer or dead-zone-causing corn-based ethanol? C'mon people!

(WSJ)

Ethanol causing Gulf of Mexico dead zone?

Is ethanol too corny?

A Science Advisory Board to the EPA is suggesting that the U.S. reduce its incentives for corn-based ethanol due to a “Dead Zone”—a hypoxic region in the Northern Gulf of Mexico (NGOM). (more)

Jane Goodell questions biofuels

Is the biofuels industry trustworthy?

"We're cutting down forests now to grow sugarcane and palm oil for biofuels and our forests are being hacked into by so many interests that it makes them more and more important to save now," Goodall said on the sidelines of the Clinton Global Initiative, former U.S. President Bill Clinton's annual philanthropic meeting.

"Biofuel isn't the answer to everything; it depends where it comes from," she said. "All of this means better education on where fuels are coming from are needed."

Biofuels are a great direction, but much of the world is headed down the wrong path full speed ahead. Money, money, money will lead to better technologies, such as cellulosic ethanol, and will justify the means according to these zealots.

Sometimes, however, when you are clearing new ground you fall off a cliff. That's where corn-based ethanol, for example, is taking America.

Unfortunately, money always seems to trump all other issues in big business, and as corporations, even big oil, become more entrenched in biofuels, will profit be all that matters?

Is Cyanobacteria the key to biofuels?

Cyanobacterium + CO2 + Sunlight = Clean and Green Energy

Forget corn, forget sugar - forget all plants. Is ethanol all about pond scum? Could replacing oil with ethanol be as simple as cyanobacterium, CO2 and sunlight?

That was the point of a display by Professor Pengchen Fu, of the University of Hawaii, at Wired's Nextfest this past weekend.

"The benefit over other techniques of producing ethanol is that this is simple and quick—taking days rather than the months required to grow crops that can be converted to ethanol," Fu told the Honolulu Advertiser back in May.

"And he believes it can be done for significantly less than the cost of gasoline and also less than the cost of ethanol produced through conventional methods.

Also, this system is not a net producer of carbon dioxide: Carbon dioxide released into the environment when ethanol is burned has been withdrawn from the environment during ethanol production."

Now that's green - pun intended.

Biodiesel wonder weed for emerging markets?

Could Jatropha provide cheap biodiesel?

I'm not a big fan of biodiesel or ethanol - at least not yet. Most important, I don't believe that the plant materials being used to develop these fuels, such as corn or soybeans, are the right ones. Still, cellulosic biofuels offer incredible potential. Thus, biofuels do have a role in America's energy paradigm, and I do believe they should be pursued.

In other areas of the world, however, biofuels offer much more potential, particularly because most other countries aren't the energy hogs that is America and our gas-guzzling culture.

Thus, CNBC has been plugging Jatropha as the "wonder weed" for emerging markets, particularly India, China, Malaysia and the Philippines. Offering 10x the oil per acre as soybeans, the once annoying weed, jatropha, could be a major money-making weed for the biofuels industry.

Unfortunately, it's not easy to play Jatropha as an investment, and it must be played through corn and soybeans, which all trade together according to CNBC.

Has ethanol hype gone too far?

Have American politicians gone ethanol crazy?

"But as politicians try to outdo one another by approving ever-bigger ethanol subsidies, production mandates and research grants, few are considering the environmental and economic effects of a massive, rapid rise in ethanol production. These are so severe that unless the mania ends soon, they could far outweigh any gains."

I've not been a big fan of ethanol, yet I do support research into ethanol production, particularly because of cellulosic ethanol. Yet, I do not see ethanol is a cure-all, not by any means.

Thus, the recent editorial, Drunk on Ethanol, in the Los Angeles Times really caught my attention.

"Ethanol will definitely play a role in our future energy mix, but not the starring role its advocates predict."

Feds give huge grant to MSU and UW to explore ethanol

How to turn it into cheap fuel

The Federal government will provide a $50 million research grant to a research team comprised of Michigan State University and the University of Wisconsin "aimed at turning ethanol into a realistic part of the nation's energy future".

"The research centers would explore how to use ordinary plant matter to produce ethanol, which would open the way for major use of ethanol as a replacement for gasoline from oil. Nearly all ethanol now burned in U.S. vehicles is made from corn, but experts say it's unlikely U.S. agriculture can produce enough corn to satisfy the nation's food and fuel needs, and corn-based ethanol still produces gases linked to climate change."

(Source: DetroitNews)

Farmers to block cellulosic ethanol?

Gotta love the pork!

"Growth of a new ethanol made from switchgrass and fast-growing trees could be limited by competition from corn growers, ethanol experts said."

“It’s hard to imagine growers have spent 25 years nurturing members of Congress to support tariffs and blenders credits... in order to give this game away to grass," C. Ford Runge, an economics professor at the University of Minnesota, told reporters at the Council on Foreign Relations in New York.

(Source: Reuters)

Argentines worried about biofuels / food conflict

Save it for food

"Yet in Argentina, where a quarter of the 38 million people remain in poverty five years after an economic crisis, some fear that a growing demand for grains to make biofuels will translate into higher food prices after two years of double-digit inflation."

"This idea of using grains to make energy instead of using them for food, now that's a problem," resident Pedro Marcote said. "Food prices keep going up and up."

And it isn't just a concern in Argentina. The U.S. is also seeing small price increases in food due to ethanol, and those increases might be just a very worrying beginning.

"Authorities should be careful about promoting biofuel use, said Loek Boonkamp, head of the agricultural trade and markets division of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development.

He estimated this year that replacing just 10 percent of the world's current petroleum use with biofuels would consume about 30 percent of all the grain, oilseed and sugar produced in the U.S., Canada, the European Union and Brazil."

(Yahoo)

Big 3 going to increase use of the flex-fuel CAFE loophole?

U.S. automakers to increase flex-fuel vehicle output

Perhaps it's the threats coming out of Congress warning Detroit that the flex-fuel credit that enables the Big 3 to violate CAFE might be ending, but the Big 3 are going to increase their flex-fuel fleets even though most of those vehicles will never utilize ethanol, at least not E85. Then again, perception is more important than reality. (Car&Driver)

Flex-fuel CAFE credits to expire?

No more CAFE credits for flex-fuel vehicles that don't use ethanol?

American automakers have been putting millions of vehicles on the road every year that offer flex-fuel technology. Yet, the far majority of those vehicles have never been filled with a tank of E85. Nonetheless, automakers have received CAFE credits enabling those automakers to avoid paying millions in fines for violating CAFE, not to mention increasing foreign oil dependency. Under new legislation in the Senate, however, that loophole could be closed in 2009 (more).

Europe dissing ethanol?

Are other biofuels a better option than ethanol?

"Cars that run on ethanol are more of a marketing gimmick," says Ferdinand Dudenhoeffer, director of the Center for Automotive Research in Gelsenkirchen, Germany.

While that might be true in Germany, other parts of Europe are interested in developing ethanol, according to an interesting article in Business Week. Nonetheless, much research is also being done into a wide range of fuels, and this diversification could benefit Europe greatly according to BW.

On the other hand, in the U.S. many bio-fuel developers claim that the U.S. is too focused on ethanol - Good ole Congress.

Forget the politicians when it comes to hybrids and biofuels?

Does it really matter which Party is in control?

If you ask me, competition works better than politicians. I'm not saying competition works perfectly, but it works better than a bunch of rich, special interest-funded partisan politicians.

Consequently, I've been very bothered that Congress has not extended Toyota's hybrid tax credits - something both Republicans and Democrats have ignored. Yet, in the last couple of years, both parties have talked considerably about energy dependence, especially foreign oil dependence and/or global warming. Yet, very little has been accomplished to alleviate these problems.

Obviously, the task is not simple. Still, it seems to me that the quickest way to make automakers deal with fuel efficiency is simple competition. Force them to act or risk losing customers.

Thus, the more success Toyota has selling hybrid vehicles, the more pressure there is.....Finish Hybrids and Biofuels: Forget the Politicians.

Politicians Blowing Bio-Fuels?

Better Biofuels killed by politicians?

"This startup adds genes to microbes so the bugs convert sugar into useful stuff—such as green fuels. "Lobbyists have a huge influence in American politicals. For example, Amyris figures it can make a diesel and a gasoline-like product that offer major advantages over ethanol and biodiesel, today's alternative-fuel darlings. "Why not look for better solutions?" says Melo. "There is a second generation of fuels coming that could be very helpful to the country." (more from BusinessWeek)

When politicians are funded by lobbyists and special interest groups, can voters really expect politicians to do the right thing?

Tough environmental regulations a boon for hybrids and bio-fuels in Europe?

How will Europe deal with CO2 emissions?

According to press releases from Frost & Sullivan, the future seems very bright for hybrid cars and alternative fuels, at least in Europe.

"As a medium-term strategy over the next three to five years, OEMs are expected to introduce micro hybrids, mild hybrids, ethanol, biofuels and LPG into their fleets to reduce CO2 emissions," notes Frost & Sullivan (http://www.automotive.frost.com) Research Analyst Krishnasami Rajagopalan. "These technologies offer increased fuel efficiency and reduced emissions, which help OEMs reduce their fleet average CO2 emissions."

"Going forward, reducing emissions below 140 g/km of CO2 will be possible mainly with the help of alternative fuels and hybrids (micro, mild and full). While OEMs are aware of this fact, further development or market acceptance of these alternative fuels and hybrids is restrained by the distribution network, availability and high implementation costs."

Poor fuel economy - Blame the consumers?

Yesterday, the director of the EPA's Office of Transportation and Air Quality, Margo Oge, told a crowd at SAE that automakers and energy companies needed to work together to achieve increased fuel economy and reduced emissions. Immediately, disagreement came from every direction, according to the DetroitNews. Is it hydrogen, is it ethanol, is it fuel cells, is it cleaner gasoline, is it hybrid cars?

While there was little consensus on any sort of answer to creating better fuel economy and reducing emissions, there was some consensus regarding consumers and their role in this conundrum. Typically, consumers want the cheapest fuel - regardless of emissions, regardless of foreign oil dependency - and consumers quickly tend to choose performance over fuel economy.

"The challenge we face is that a vast majority of our customers choose fuel based on cost and convenience even over concerns such as greenhouse gases," Shell Oil Vice President for Fuel Development Darran Messem said.

Steve Plotkin, transportation energy analyst at Argonne National Laboratory, added "Americans have chosen performance over efficiency for years," as he suggested that the government will have to mandate some standards.

I say forget mandates, let's do a gas tax. It makes consumers take action that will require a fuel economy-driven reaction from automakers. Ultimately, if consumers aren't part of the solution, then the problem will only get bigger.

BlueFire turns landfills into ethanol

Turning methane rich landfills into ethanol

BlueFire isn't just ready for cellulosic ethanol, but the company is also ready to turn cellulosic materials from landfills into feedstock and ethanol according to company press releases.

"Our technology will convert widely available, inexpensive, organic materials such as agricultural residues, high-content biomass crops, wood residues, and cellulose from landfills into clean, renewable fuels. This process provides low-emissions fuels for cleaner cars and less pollution from our transportation sector. At the same time, our biorefinery located at landfill sites and using landfill cellulose also reduces the much more potent greenhouse gas, methane, by using post-sorted municipal solid waste as feedstock and available landfill gas to generate thermal and electricity needs."

New study claims ethanol would increase air pollution

Switching to ethanol from gasoline isn't good for air pollution according to a new study, and such a move would actually increase the deaths in the U.S. caused by automotive-caused air pollution. "It's not green in terms of air pollution," said study author Mark Jacobson, a Stanford University civil and environmental engineering professor. "If you want to use ethanol, fine, but don't do it based on health grounds."

(DetroitNews)

GM's Lutz says fuel efficiency too expensive

Are flex-fuel lies killing GM?

GM's Bob Lutz is claiming that President Bush's plans to increase automobile fuel efficiency could raise the cost of automobiles by $5000.00, according to the DetroitNews. Rather than increase fuel efficiency, Lutz claims increased availability of ethanol is a better solution.

I'm so tired of hearing about GM's ethanol plans. First, GM is using cheap flex-fuel technology as a loophole to violate CAFE. As a result GM can't even meet the CAFE laws created 20 years ago, let alone more stringent rules. Consequently, GM is using legal loopholes to avoid paying massive fines, while increasing America's foreign oil dependency more than should be allowed by law. Second, corn-based ethanol is not a good solution to resolving America's energy problems. Third, GM is an automaker, not an energy company, so focus on automotive technology.

While Toyota achieves record months of sales significantly helped by hybrid cars, such as the Prius, GM has yet to sell one full hybrid vehicle. Why? Why can't GM realize that fuel efficiency is becoming ever more a critical aspect of automobile manufacturing survival - possibly and probably the key to the automotive future?

The good 'ole days of gas-guzzling land yachts are over. Deal with it.

Even with Democrats, no Toyota hybrid tax credits. Does America suck?

Is leaving Iraq a solution or a distraction?

While Democrats keep beating the Leave Iraq drum, they continue to do little to resolve the problem that eventually pushed America into Iraq in the first place: oil. While there isn't anything that can be done to immediately end foreign oil dependency, there are small actions that create strong messages that could result in real action. Extending Toyota's tax credits is one such action.

Besides, Toyota deserves the extension. Hybrid cars, plug-in hybrid vehicles - these vehicles wouldn't even be on the world's radar if not for Toyota. Even today, the Big 3 - led by GM - can't get off the ethanol crazy train. Fortunately, even the mainstream media are finally starting to address the truth about flex-fuel vehicles and corn-based ethanol - its a scam (See BW).

--> Finish Democrats suck: Why no Toyota hybrid tax credits

Automakers shun fuel efficient technology for fuel

Shouldn't automakers be more focused on fuel efficiency, rather than on alternative fuels?

I hate being critical of the biofuel movement, but it is simply a fact that corn-based ethanol is just not a very good bio-fuel. Moreover, there are plenty of questions still left unresolved regarding bio-fuels, especially until cellulosic ethanol is economically achieved.

For example, if we triple or quadruple ethanol consumption, how much will food prices increase? Also, considering that water is more and more labeled as the next oil, is it wise to use so much of this precious resource to fuel our vehicles via water-greedy corn? Furthermore, will global warming affect our ability to produce many bio-fuels? And that's just for starters.

Finish Fuels rather than fuel efficiency

Plug-in hybrids: The batteries of alternative energy?

The key to alternative energies, such as wind and solar power?

While some have worried about the environmental effect that plug-in hybrid vehicles might have because of their electricity consumption, others see plug-in hybrids as an integral part of alternative energy production.

"One of the things holding back power from wind is that it's hard to store," says Lester Brown, president of the Earth Policy Institute in Washington "Basically plug-in batteries could become storage for wind power."

Interestingly, Brown made these statements while discussing how plug-in hybrids could help food prices. As ethanol use increases, so too will food prices. Since plug-in hybrids limit the need for liquid fuel, Brown asserts that less ethanol would be needed.

As I regularly state, the best of hybrid cars is yet to come.

Minnesota tops California's clean energy moves

The state of California recently announced that it would require that 20 percent of its energy come from renewable sources by 2010. Now, Minnesota will require that 25 percent of its energy will come from renewable energy sources by 2025. While California's goals are more aggressive and meaningful, it is great to see this type of action by more and more states.

According to Reuters, "The state will rely on wind power to meet most of the requirement, with solar power and cellulosic ethanol from prairie grass also potential sources."

It will be interesting to see how different states use different types of renewable energy. For example, it seems that solar power probably makes more sense in California than in Minnesota. Whereas ethanol might make more sense in Minnesota.

I guess the next question is, Will Minnesota, like California, try to ban the lightbulb?