The recently enacted U.S. Energy Independence and Security Act mandated 36 billion gallons of biofuels by 2022. Good luck with that. Purchasing.com reports that soaring corn prices, a go-go ethanol industry and so-so E85 sales have turned the current bio-fuels boom into a damp squib. "Late last year, about 5.6 billion annual gallons of new or expanded fermentation ethanol capacity was due for completion in 2008, reports Nathan Schaffer, a fuels analyst with PFC Energy in Houston. Of that, he says, about a quarter has been 'put on hold or taken off the boards' since the start of the fourth quarter of 2007." Maybe that's because America already has an eight billion gal/year ethanol production capacity, relative to six billion gallons worth of domestic consumption. As R. Jeffrey DeReamer, president of EthanolMarket.com puts it "Supply is not going to be an issue for [ethanol] buyers this year." Ya think? Oh, and "domestically produced ethanol will be supplemented by imports of the commodity from Brazil and the Caribbean this summer." If the ethanol industry is going to stand on its own two feet (i.e. stop sucking on the government tit), consumers and retailers better fall in love with E85 STAT.  

Faced with a decision between a tax grab (a.k.a. closing a loophole) and environmentally-oriented political correctness, the UK government decided to take the money and run. Business Car (BC) reports that the UK's Chancellor of the Exchequer will shit can [paraphrasing] the current biofuel duty differential, That's the bit of the budget that subsidises E85 by up to 20p per litre. BC has no doubts about the decision's impact on the darling of America's corn growers, calling it "the death knell for E85 biofuel as a viable fuel in the UK." Minister Darling (true story) threw the bio-fuel boys a bone, creating the Renewable Transport Fuel Obligation. The new boondoggle calls for all road transport fuels to contain 5.75 percent biofuel by 2010, well behind America's corn-fed 10 percent mandate.

The Florida Department of Environmental Protection’s Renewable Energy Technologies Grants Program is forking-over $1.5m of residents' hard-earned tax dollars to an incipient E85 producer making ethanol from sweet sorghum juice– rather than corn squeezins. Discounting all the Starbuckian Fair Trade blather– the Renergie company wants to build small local plants, give farmers a royalty from [theoretical] E85 sales, etc.– sorghum's advantages over corn include less pesticides and water requirements, higher yield (4700 to 7500 liters per hectare), rapid growth and the ability to grow marginal soil. Yes, well, as Checkbiotech reports, the song remains the same: subsidies! "Once state approval is received, Renergie’s variable blending pumps will be able to offer the consumer a choice of E10, E20, E30 and E85. Via use of the Blender’s Tax Credit, Renergie will be able to ensure that gas station owners are adequately compensated for each gallon of fuel-grade ethanol that is sold via Renergie’s variable blending pumps at their gas stations." 

The New York Times reports that biodiesel producers are dumping vegetable oil byproducts into local streams and rivers, harming wildlife.The National Biodiesel Board claims that their members' industrial byproducts are "nontoxic, biodegradable and suitable for sensitive environments." Yes, well, Bruce P. Hollebone, researcher with Environment Canada, says the result is some bad shit for birds and fish. "As with most organic materials, oil and glycerin deplete the oxygen content of water very quickly, and that will suffocate fish and other organisms. And for birds, a vegetable oil spill is just as deadly as a crude oil spill.”  The problem is, of course, money. "Glycerin, an alcohol that is normally nontoxic, can be sold for secondary uses, but it must be cleaned first, a process that is expensive and complicated. Expanded production of biodiesel has flooded the market with excess glycerin, making it less cost-effective to clean and sell." And more cost effective to dump in untreated form. The National Biodiesel Board dismissed a litany of violations as "growing pains" for an industry that's doubled in the last year (to 160 plants). Oh, that's OK then.

Daniel Yergin is the Pulitzer-winning oil historian/author of The Prize, chairman of Cambridge Energy Research Associates (CERA) and a steadfast energy optimist. Peakist wags at The Oil Drum have defined a "yergin" as CERA's predicted long-term oil index price of $38/bbl. Oil prices currently hover around 2.7 yergins, but Yergin and CERA still carry a lot of weight in the energy consulting biz. US News & World Report's "Beyond the Barrel" blogs that Yergin now sees renewable energy as a serious player in energy markets. Speaking at the Washington International Renewable Energy Conference, Yergin told attendees, "We are going through a period of what I call the 'great bubbling,' a high degree of innovation all across the energy spectrum… This is boosting the competitiveness of renewables and efficiency, and is also evident in terms of conventional energy." CERA forecasts that so-called clean power could supply between seven and 16 percent of the world's electric needs by 2030. That's a significantly greater percentage than U.S. government forecasts of 4.2 percent (which blithely include ethanol as clean energy). Meanwhile, gas prices continue to escalate. The AP reports they've ascended by near-as-dammit a dime in the last two weeks.

Although we haven't seen studies on the subject, we suspect that many motorists who fill-up with E85 don't return once they discover the [unadvertised] reduction in efficiency vs. "normal" (E10) gas. Maybe that's why none of the major oil companies have installed E85 pumps. The ethanol industry realizes that all the subsidies in the world won't guarantee them a future if consumers line-up none deep for E85. But… what if you doubled demand by increasing the mandatory ethanol content for ALL gas blends from 10 to 20 percent? Corrosion? What corrosion? According The Toledo Blade, Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty released a report by The North Star State's "two largest research universities" that claims the move would be safe for non-E85-compatible cars. "The study tested 40 pairs of vehicles, half of which were powered with fuel containing 20 percent ethanol, and compared performance and damage, finding little difference between the two fuels. Part of the study was funded by the Renewable Fuels Association, an advocacy organization for the ethanol industry." What's the bet they funded the part that says it's OK to double ethanol content?

Britain's Advertising Standard Authority has called-out a Saab ad for its E85-capable, "BioPower" vehicles. The ad claims "bioethanol consumption does not significantly raise atmospheric levels of CO2." The watchdog agency also received complaints about the ad's claim that E85 reduced C02 emissions by 70 percent over normal gasoline– but dismissed them. Saab was able to prove that the assertion is factually true… if you use Brazilian sugar-ethanol. Still, it seems like Saab ad execs could have done the math and discovered that even with a best-case 70 percent reduction in C02 emissions, 30 percent of a gas-powered Saab's emissions still qualify as a "significant contribution" towards atmospheric carbon. Of course they didn't, which is why the ASA ruled that the ad is "misleading" as readers are "likely to infer that bioethanol did not add a significant amount of CO2 to the atmosphere." What a concept: requiring fairness, math skills and even-handedness of people who are just trying to save the world by selling more cars. Now if only we had a watchdog to similarly debunk the pro-E85 falsehoods spewed by America's business and political leaders. Oh wait… you're reading it. 

At the International Renewable Energy Center, President Bush was shown a modified plug-in hybrid Toyota Prius and a Mack truck with a biodiesel-friendly Volvo engine. According to The Detroit News, Bush sang the body politic electric. "We want our city people driving not on gasoline but on electricity. And the goal, the short-term goal, is to have vehicles that are capable of driving the first 40 miles on electricity." (Not coincidentally, 40 miles is the projected EV range of the Chevy Volt.) While the Prez signed an energy bill mandating 36b gallons of ethanol by 2022, he's refused to fund advanced battery research (chump change at $500m over five years). "We've got to get off oil," the former oilman pronounced. "Dependency on oil presents a real challenge to our economy." Yeah, but how about political dependency on subsidies?

OK, we're not just looking for the number of questionable E85 propaganda pronouncements in this video report on Autoblog founder Jason Calacanis' Mahalo Daily. We're also interested in the quality of your dissection (i.e. what they didn't say as well as what they did). Bonus points will be awarded for avoiding jargon and (of course) sarcasm. And yes, you can point out fascinating, non-E85-oriented details gleaned from the vid (music, dress, eyebrow work, attempts to avoid staring at certain biological bits, accents, etc.). There is no prize for your punditry per se, but Frank and I will choose the commentator who's the most infotaining and post their name underneath this text, in recognition of your (yes your) service to the cause of common sense environmentalism (the emphasis here on mental). We're talking major props from TTAC's Best and Brightest, as well. Take no prisoners. (As if.)
[Thanks to minion444 for the link]

And the winner for the most infotaining post is...  AKM

Green has always been an essential part of the Bentley experience… lots and lots of green. But today the British automaker unveiled its plan to join the wave of manufacturers offering more environmentally-friendly drivetrains. You know; eventually. The German-owned British brand will begin its transformation from maker of CO2-spewing playthings for the over-moneyed set to eco-conscious planetary champions by offering a flex-fuel option next year. ("James, take the Bentley down to London and fill it up with ethanol"). By 2015, Bentley will provide E85 compatibility across their entire lineup (all six models). And while you're recovering from that shock, the Bentley Boyz will begin development of an unspecified drivetrain that will deliver 40 percent better fuel efficiency than their normal gas-sucking mills. In the short term, Bentley says its socially responsible engineering efforts will focus on enhanced engine management; new, improved transmissions and drivelines and weight reduction. Torque about greenwashing…

A report by the Minneapolis-based Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy warns that the ethanol industry's appetite for H20 may torpedo its future. As reported by The Economist, "a typical ethanol factory producing 50m gallons of biofuels a year needs about 500 gallons of water a minute." The mag cites opposition to plants in Missouri, Minnesota, Iowa, Nebraska, Kansas and in central Illinois based on proposed plants draining local aquifers. As we've reported before, Florida is amongst those states providing ethanol-justified subsidies to its corn growers. And yet… "OFFICIALS in Tampa, Florida, got a surprise recently when a local firm building the state's first ethanol-production factory put in a request for 400,000 gallons (1.5m litres) a day of city water. The request by US Envirofuels would make the facility one of the city's top ten water consumers overnight, and the company plans to double its size. Florida is suffering from a prolonged drought. Rivers and lakes are at record lows and residents wonder where the extra water will come from." While the ethanol industry has halved its H20 needs in the last ten years, 50 percent of a massive amount of water to turn corn into ethanol still ain't chicken feed. Literally. [thanks to starlightmica for the link]

Whether in print or in their private thoughts, most Peak Oil believers grapple with the immediate effects of oil scarcity. They picture a scenario based on history or speculative fiction, refining their expectations as the real future reveals itself and like Kafka's ape, looking for a way out. In today's Falls Church News-Press, Tom Whipple postulates that increasingly precious liquid fuels will be allocated to aircraft and ships. Since cellulosic biofuels and hydrogen are not ready for prime time, he expects that our already available electric power grid will be the most likely ground transport fuel for the immediate future. But in Peak Oil prognostication, all solutions reveal even deeper problems. Electric cars may serve in a limited capacity, but will we have enough resources to actually build them? Will any but the very rich be able to afford them?

GM Canada is applauding a new Canadian government program to distribute $3m over two years for a pilot program to "demonstrate E85 fueling infrastructure and promote its commercialization." The measure is part of a $250m Automotive Innovation Fund aimed at supporting the Canadian auto industry's transition to greater mandated fuel efficiency. The PR flacks at GM Canada crow [via Marketwire], that The General's head start in ethanol-capable technology "offers another very practical and affordable way for Canadian drivers to literally cut their net vehicle CO2 emissions in half"– as long as they ignore the environmental and crop price impacts associated with ethanol production. Oh, and Canada has set aside another $10m for two years worth of biofuels emissions research. 

Rising food prices, sinking water tables, deforestation leading to increased CO2 levels, billions in taxpayer subsidies; what else could you possibly have against ethanol? How about this [via Yahoo! News]: "Ethanol fires are harder to put out than gasoline ones and require a special type of firefighting foam. Many fire departments around the country don't have the foam, don't have enough of it, or are not well-trained in how to apply it, firefighting experts say. It is also more expensive than conventional foam." Unlike many of the effects of America's rush to ethanol, this is a danger you can see. Have seen. "In the last three months of 2007, three major fires pointed up the danger. In western Pennsylvania, nine ethanol tanker cars derailed and triggered a blaze that tied up a busy rail line. In Missouri, a tanker truck carrying several thousand gallons of ethanol and gasoline crashed near the state Capitol, killing the driver. The flames spurred the evacuation of two elementary schools and forced the state to rebuild a badly damaged bridge. And in Ohio, a train heading through the northeastern part of the state to Buffalo, N.Y., derailed and burned, forcing more than 1,000 people from their homes." Now how much would you pay? [thanks to David Holzman for the link]

[TTAC interview with HAZMAT expert Jack Currie below] 

California's leaders are dreaming of a biofueled future, and they see E85 ethanol as a step in the right direction… for their campaign war chests. The LA Times reports that California wants to increase the availability of the 85 percent corn-based biofuel, by earmarking $25m in grants to set up 34 new E85 refueling stations. Unfortunately for those Californians who value clean air and energy efficiency, E85 takes more (fossil) fuel to refine than it offers, actually decreases fuel efficiency and increases emissions. Pretty ironic considering that the plan is justified by the California Environmental Protection Agency's Air Resource Board as a crucial component of the state's Climate Action Plan. So why is the state of California subsidizing the infrastructure of such a short-sighted fuel product? So that people in the fuel business don't have to actually pay for it themselves, of course. Installing an E85 pump costs about $50k. As Chevron spokesman Leif Sollid puts it "our marketers and retailers have not expressed a widespread desire to install E85 at their stations." Well, of course they haven't… because they know the only way to sell an unpopular product is to get the government to subsidize it. They also know that their $50k buys a lot more value as campaign campaign contributions.