Mikey Likes It
Bush's pick to head the USDA is a big ethanol booster
By Amanda Griscom Little
09 Dec 2004
http://www.grist.org/news/muck/2004/12/09/little-johanns/index.html
At a White House ceremony last week announcing the nomination of
Nebraska Gov. Mike Johanns (R) to succeed Ann Veneman as
agriculture secretary, President Bush called his pick "a strong
proponent of alternative energy sources, such as ethanol and
biodiesel," later adding that "in a new term, we'll continue
policies that are pro-growth, pro-jobs, and pro-farmer."
Johanns (left) accepts nomination, as wife Stephanie looks on.
Funny he didn't mention "pro-corn."
Hailing from a state ranked as the third-largest corn producer in
the nation, Johanns has had obvious economic reasons to be a strong
advocate for ethanol, the gasoline additive derived primarily from
fermented corn. Thanks in part to Johanns, who in 2001 served as
chair of the Governors' Ethanol Coalition, Nebraska currently boasts
11 ethanol plants and is the nation's fourth-largest producer of the
alternative fuel.
Right now the ethanol industry is going gangbusters: In the past four
years, it has seen explosive growth of 20 to 30 percent annually, and
further expansion is predicted. According to Gary Blumenthal, who
served as farm adviser to George H.W. Bush and is now the head of
World Perspectives, a Washington, D.C.-based agriculture
consulting company, "currently about 12 percent of the country's corn
yield goes to ethanol production, but I've heard projections that this
trend will increase to 20 percent in less than a decade."
Johanns is just the guy to make that happen, according to the
American Coalition for Ethanol. "The nomination definitely bodes
well for ethanol," said Brian Jennings, the organization's executive
vice president. "We have confidence that Johanns will do everything
necessary to continue growing America's ethanol industry."
But while ACE and other pro-ethanol groups, along with the Bush
administration, rave about the environmental benefits of corn-based
ethanol over traditional gasoline, some environmentalists call these
accolades misleading, if not downright delusional. They worry that
ethanol boosters are interested not so much in alternative fuels,
but in pumping massive subsidies into the corn industry.
Corn is, in fact, America's No. 1 subsidized crop, according to
Kenneth Cook, president of the Environmental Working Group.
The U.S. Department of Agriculture doled out more than $37 billion in
corn subsidies between 1995 and 2003. "The reason we paid such
huge corn subsidies is that we grew much more than we needed
domestically, so the market was glutted and prices bottomed out,"
Cook told Muckraker. "The export market didn't lift up prices.
That's why corn growers want to make ethanol in the worst way.
It's a get-rid-of-the-surplus-corn strategy."
This corn is not for eating.
Photo: USDA.
It's no wonder, then, that more than 90 percent of ethanol produced
today comes from corn, even though the fuel can be made from a
broad range of biomass materials ranging from wheat and barley to
woodchips, waste lumber, and switch grass. The latter is a
fast-growing crop dense in cellulose, easy to grow without chemicals,
and favored by enviros as the best source for so-called "cellulosic"
ethanol.
A number of enviro groups have long criticized corn-based ethanol
production for the huge fossil-fuel inputs that are required on the
front end to grow and harvest the corn and convert it to fuel. And yet
they're not opposed to ethanol outright: Cellulosic ethanol, they say,
has far greater environmental benefits than the corn-derived kind.
The Grass Is Always Greener ...
"When you look at the full fuel-cycle analysis of corn-based ethanol
versus cellulosic ethanol, the latter has huge greenhouse-gas
advantages," said Jeff Fiedler, a climate-policy specialist at the
Natural Resources Defense Council.
In fact, corn-based ethanol offers surprisingly scanty reductions in
greenhouse-gas emissions. Natural gas is a key ingredient in the
nitrogen fertilizer used on corn crops; coal and natural gas power the
process of converting corn into fuel; diesel gasoline powers the
tractors used to plant and harvest the corn. Given these fossil-fuel
inputs, the greenhouse-gas emissions associated with corn-based
ethanol are only about 15 percent lower than those of traditional
gasoline.
In contrast, ethanol derived from switch grass results in a 95 percent
reduction in greenhouse gases compared to refining and burning
gasoline, Fiedler says. The crop requires little to no fertilizer, and
switch-grass plowing and management require only relatively
low-intensity machinery.
Switch grass, however, has its drawbacks: The acreage required to
produce a unit of ethanol from switch grass is considerably greater
than the acreage of corn needed to produce the same amount of fuel.
(At current efficiencies, the entire country would have to be blanketed
with switch grass from sea to shining sea to produce enough ethanol to
power the U.S. car fleet.) Furthermore, the process of converting
switch grass to fuel is currently more complicated and costly than that
for corn -- more than three times as expensive, according to the
Renewable Fuels Association, the trade association for the U.S.
ethanol industry. "While it would cost roughly $250 million to build a
cellulosic ethanol plant today, it would cost roughly $70 million for a
corn-based ethanol plant," said Monte Shaw, spokesperson for
RFA.
Pulling the ol' switcheroo: A field of switch grass.
Photo: NREL.
The price disparity is due in part to the fact that corn-based ethanol
has taken the lion's share of research-and-development funding.
Fiedler argues that with the right R&D investments to improve the
grass-to-fuel conversion process, condense crop plantings, and move
switch grass into the mainstream, cellulosic ethanol could be
cost-competitive in under 10 years. "If we double efficiency of the
cars, double the density of switch grass per acre, and double
conversion efficiency per ton of switch grass, then the amount of
acreage needed to power all of America's cars drops to the
100-million-acre range -- roughly the amount of acreage currently
used to grow corn in this country," said Fiedler. Already, innovators
have cut the cost of the enzymes used for the switch-grass conversion
process 20-fold over the last four years.
Fiedler argues that if the ethanol industry were required to meet
specific environmental performance requirements, switch grass would
have a clear advantage over corn given both its greenhouse-gas
benefits and its agricultural benefits, because it's easier on
the soil and therefore a more sustainable crop.
The ethanol industry isn't wild about the idea. "Farmers are going to
plant what makes them money," said Shaw. "And right now there is no
market for switch grass. The environmentalists keep saying it's going
to be much more energy-efficient and lower in greenhouse gases [than
corn-based ethanol] when we figure out how to make it cost-competitive.
All that's true -- as long as you underline the word when.
And the reality is: not today."
Moreover, creating a market for switch grass would require innovative
thinking on a federal level, of the sort unlikely to come from the
Bush administration. Johanns, for his part, is not known for going
against the grain -- or the kernel, as it were. "The profile he cut
in Nebraska as a politician was pro-corporate, pro-subsidy, pro-Bush,"
said EWG's Cook. "He was a huge supporter of the 2002 farm bill.
I think it's safe to assume he resists reform.
He's comfortable with the status quo."
According to Blumenthal, Johanns is considered a golden boy among
the Bushies: "The White House heavily recruited him. He possesses
unusual political firepower for this position -- not since President
Kennedy has an administration managed to get a sitting governor to
take a post as secretary of agriculture."
Blumenthal added that despite increasing pressure on the Department
of Agriculture to curtail the massive farm subsidies it doles out,
Johanns will not likely experience any scaling back of his budget:
"Red states are largely rural, agrarian states, and the president
will not want to do anything to the agriculture budget that will
hurt the red states. Moreover, the USDA nominee is an important
political ally to the Bush administration and Republicans in Congress:
"Johanns is very popular in the Midwest -- he's shown an ability to
please and motivate agrarian voters -- so he'll be very effective
for Republicans in the 2006 [congressional] elections."
Bottom line: The Bush administration is not likely to encourage
corn growers to convert millions of acres of the great American crop
to a little-known, mangy-looking grass. But from the perspective of
those who consider global warming a great American threat, such a
conversion could be an act of true patriotism.
_______________________________________________
Biofuel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel
Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html
Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable):
http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
