A new study of alternative energy strategies by Stanford professor Mark Jacobsen [via Green Car Congress] ranks corn-based and biomass ethanol as among the worst alternatives to fossil fuels. According to the study, “the Tier 4 combinations (cellulosic- and corn-E85) were ranked lowest overall and with respect to climate, air pollution, land use, wildlife damage, and chemical waste. Cellulosic-E85 ranked lower than corn-E85 overall, primarily due to its potentially larger land footprint based on new data and its higher upstream air pollution emissions than corn-E85.” These results were calculated by comparing wind-powered battery-electric vehicles (BEVs), wind-powered hydrogen fuel cell vehicles (HFCVs), concentrated-solar-powered-BEVs, geothermal-powered-BEVs, tidal-powered-BEVs, solar-photovoltaic-powered-BEVs, wave-powered-BEVs, hydroelectric-powered-BEVs, nuclear-powered-BEVs, coal-with-carbon-capture-powered-BEVs, corn-E85 vehicles, and cellulosic-E85 vehicles (listed in order of the study’s calculated impacts).

Read More >

The New York Times reports that a casualty of lower oil and gas prices: interest in funding renewable energy projects. Among the Times’ laundry list of programs hurting for money: Tesla (duh), corn ethanol (hooray), other biofuels, and wind and solar power. The financial troubles are the consequence of a pretty simple financial concept – that there’s only so much money to go around. And we hear there’s a credit crunch in progress. So with gas and oil coming down in price, renewable energy isn’t where opportunistic investors want to be risking their somewhat-limited resources. The depressing part of the story is this all-too-obvious observation from Times writer Clifford Kraus:

Read More >

There is no greater condemnation of an industry's lack of competitive spirit than seeing its executives hanging around political conventions. Their sudden interest in the future direction of America sends a single resounding message: we have failed on our merits and our misery demands company. And while Detroit snuggles up to Obama, courtesy of McCain's semi-stand against a D2.8 bailout, the E85 lobby gets to represent the failures of America's auto and energy businesses at the Republican convention in Minneapolis. Of course, it helps that Minnesota is a standard-bearer for ethanol, bringing countless millions in pork to the land of a thousand lakes. But the mere presence of E85-backers at the RNC convention isn't enough to hammer home the ugly, thoughtless greed of the corn-juice movement. Domesticfuel.com reports that the American Lung Association of the Upper Midwest has purchased a number of pro-ethanol TV spots and billboards aimed specifically at the Donkey do. "Addicted to Oil?" asks a sign on the St. Paul skyway. The query that really begs an answer here is "what the hell is a respiratory health advocacy group doing schilling for agribusiness?" Meanwhile, yesterday's E85BOTD poster child POET has given the University of South Dakota a $3.9m grant to study cellulosic ethanol. First, why not just build another plant, considering POET's first cellulosic ethanol plant in Scotland cost $4m? Second, will this research grant simply provide academic fodder for the corn farming lobby's campaigns? And third, why didn't POET ask the government to fund this grant? Is ethanol finally learning to stand on its own? Don't count on it.

It's always fun to see analysts justify their way to a predetermined conclusion, especially when the facts do not come close supporting it. At the usually on-point SeekingAlpha blog, Tim Plaehn tries his hand at another round of corn juice justification, this time with a new twist: cobs, baby. Claiming that high food prices create incentives for "efficiency and innovation" rather than say, cutting the cord, Plaehn lays out the roadmap for the ethanol industry's next big thing. Since everyone and their senile grandparents know that cellulosic, not feedstock-based, ethanol is the future, Plaehn appropriates what little future the biomass-based fuel has into the ethanol farm subsidy racket. He points to a company (POET) that uses cellulosic ethanol extraction to squeeze some extra juice from corn cobs, rather than non-feedstock biomass crops, arguing that the expensive technology will extract 27 percent more ethanol per acre of corn. If we're talking about investing in cellulosic extraction, it makes far more sense to base it off of such low-impact, high-efficiency crops as switchgrass. Except that this far more logical approach would mean the end of government ethanol subsidies to corn producers. So what other miracles does Plaehn forecast to allow ethanol to reduce dependence on foreign oil? More expensive technology of course, only this time we're talking blending pumps which could dial in the exact amount of ethanol consumers want in their gas. Choosing between E20, E30, E40, etc sounds great, but at what cost an all-new infrastructure? That's precisely beside the point for the ethanol lobby, who know that infrastructure-building is just another great way to get the government to subsidize their marginally-viable product. But this is exactly what you should expect from a heavily criticized, multi-billion-dollar pork project that claims to be chasing "efficiency and innovation" without ever truly exposing itself to market influences.

Government fleet purchases are a major factor in keeping the ethanol crazy-train rolling. Not to mention damning evidence of ethanol's inviability on the free market. But even local governments who hoped that cheap ethanol would reduce costs and support energy independence are beginning to realize that switching to corn juice just brings lower mileage and higher food prices. In fact, the Times Herald-Record reports that Orange County, NY actually did the math and found that the 25 percent reduction in efficiency with ethanol outweighed any benefits. And that's not even including the costs of installing a new pump and fuel tank. And keep in mind we're not talking about some business that is continuously hacking away at its bottom line. Governments are usually more than happy to spend a little extra on something like ethanol that will provide a "we're doing the right thing" PR buzz. Indeed, E85 has come as far as it has based largely on government fleet purchases made as political favors to the ethanol alliance. Now that local governments can no longer justify ethanol's shocking inefficiency, the party seems to be winding up. And not a moment too soon.

Wesson veggie oil, lye, high quality methanol, an old margarita mixer, and some patience; thats all you need to create your own batch of pure biodiesel, suitable for use in your average two-year old, raceworthy Jetta TDI. Sure, it looked more like something you would dip your bread in at Olive Garden, but I was not only going to be driving like a hooligan at the local SCCA event, I was saving the planet (I should sell some carbon credits)! Using directions I found on-line, I planned to whip up a five-gallon batch of biodiesel (to see if I could) in the 11th-floor confines of my apartment. Not knowing what to expect, I ended up with a huge mess, a ruined margarita mixer, and about three gallons of biodiesel of dubious quality (it was supposed to be nearly translucent). Turbidity issues aside, I put a single gallon in the tank of my Jetta, along with five gallons of regular diesel, and ran around town. No issues, so the weekend's race was on! The other two gallons were then thrown in, and the race commenced. One hundred bhp aside, the Jetta performed admirably with mild body lean, communicative steering, decent brakes, monster torque, and laughable grip. The oppressive Oklahoma heat erased all perception of driving a commuter sedan; no, I was piloting the Audi R10 TDI down the Mulsanne straight in the Le Mans! But unlike Audi, I couldn't claim victory, as I was the only one in my racing class. But my adventure in going green shall not end there. Stay tuned as I attempt to make ethanol for my Porsche!

Those wacky Brits– you never know just what they'll try next. From Motor Trader comes a report that farmer Steve Burgess has become the first person to cross the Bering Strait in a land vehicle. He floated across the 56-mile stretch from Russia to Alaska in a Land Rover Defender equipped with pontoons, a propeller and motor. His 10,379-mile trek from his home in Yorkshire was sponsored by Cooper Tires. Back in Merry Olde England, earlier this month Top Gear's James Mays and oenophile Oz Clarke ran a Radical SR4 racing car from 0 ot 60 in 3.5 seconds using "a special distillation of whisky." Bruichladdich distillery manager Duncan MacGillivray said "The exhaust smells much better than petrol. It's a sustainable biofuel; but at £26 a litre, the duty and VAT isn't, so it's not a viable alternative just yet." Of course, that just begs the question of whether the police could charge you with DUI if your car had whiskey on its breath.

Those of you headed to the California State Fair this month can take the kiddies along for brainwashing "a new eco-friendly show" at the "Buick-Pontiac-GMC Rainforest Pavilion." What the division that produces some of GM's biggest and thirstiest vehicles has to do with the rainforest escapes me at the moment, but the "'green' fun" features a "Dr. Greenius Biofuel" as host and "will engage fair-goers with interactive fun while also educating about alternative fuels and how to be more eco-friendly in day-to-day life." The kiddos can participate in "hands-on demonstrations like learning to juggle, piecing together puzzles, and playing with an easy squeezy biofuel tool demonstrating the difference between petroleum and ethanol in a fun-filled way." And then once you're through in the Rain Forest, you can shuffle over to the "Chevy Alt Fuel Magical Biodome" to see "Harry Hybrid-dini" with "an act that incorporates alternative fuel words of wisdom." And of course, "Chevrolet, Buick, Pontiac and GMC will present a variety of fuel-friendly vehicles to explore throughout the Fair." If you've managed to hold down your lunch so far, or really do believe that the children are our future, you can read the entire press release here.

Click here for the full press release

In a recent interview with the Weekly Standard, Iowa Senator Charles Grassley weighed-in on the food-for-fuel debate. "If part of our problem is that the Chinese are going to eat meat and you've got to have corn and soybeans to feed the Chinese their meat, then why isn't it just as legitimate for the Chinese to go back and eat rice as it is for us to change our policy on corn to ethanol?" Despite the growing consensus (so to speak) that ethanol is not an environmentally-friendly fuel, drives up food prices and contributes to world starvation, Grassley isn't willing to surrender the $4.5b of federal ethanol subsidies and the farm lobby support that goes with it. The Weekly Standard condemns Grassley's position. "As this 'let them eat rice' soundbite made clear, the debate over the food versus fuel issue is about as undignified as a full out real food fight at a summer camp cafeteria."  

Turns out TTAC isn't alone with its Tesla Death Watch and Volt Birth Watch series: Toyota has its own going. EV World's (sub) Bill Moore got this and a few other juicy tidbits from a casual conversation with Toyota's "grumpy old man" Bill Reinert, National Manager of the Advanced Technology Group. Toyota has a Death Watch going on Fisker , Tesla, and…the Chevy Volt. Toyota doesn't think any of them will ever be built in large volumes, because their Li-Ion batteries are simply too expensive to be cost-effective. He also cited concerns over global supplies of lithium. Meanwhile, Toyota is hard at work on next-generation batteries , especially air battery chemistry, including zinc-air, as well as stepping up production of NiMH packs and starting Li-Ion factories. What's the line about not "having all your eggs in one basket"? Reinert also thinks it's unrealistic to expect owners of plug-in to only tap the mains at night. Utilities are going to have to step up capacity. And forget about all the 2010 Prius spy shots floating around the web, they're just cobbled-up mules based on the current Prius. Toyota is famous for keeping their final products under wraps (just one of the many differences with GM). And one more goodie from the grumpy Toyota brain trust: "liquid peak" (every conceivable liquid fuel from petroleum, coal and biofuel) arrives in 2018. That's when global demand will outstrip capacity to produce them all.

Back in the day, T. Boone Pickens questioned why his then-boss, presidential nominee Bob Dole supported ethanol. Dole's answer was telling. "Let me explain something to you about politics," the Kansas Republican replied. "There are 21 farm states, and that's 42 senators. Don't waste any more of our time or your time telling us it's a bad idea, because they're going to do it." And when politics trumps policy, you get stories like this one from The Oil Drum (TOD). With gas consumption likely to decline thanks to high prices, TOD wanted to know if federal ethanol mandates would sink with the market. The Department of Energy told them ethanol mandates are still set to increase, from 9b gallons this year to 12b gallons in 2011. Which raises a problem: what to do with it all. By DOE estimates, there won't be enough gasoline to "absorb" that much ethanol in standard E10 blends in 2011. There's also not enough E85 pumping stations (or "infrastructure") for the corn juice. In other words, the feds are mandating more ethanol than we can use so that Midwest senators will be pliant for other senators' pork projects. We've sure got this energy thing licked, huh?

Bioethanol is so last year. Biomass Magazine (yes, there really is such a publication) reports the latest research in biofuels is directed at producing "green hydrocarbon fuels.' While biodiesel is becoming relatively commonplace, it's based on oils derived from plants and animal fats. Green hydrocarbon fuels are second-generation biofuels made from the same biomass materials used for bioethanol, with several advantages. Since they're chemically identical to the petroleum-based fuels, they carry the same amount of energy. Unlike ethanol, no vehicular modifications are required, AND they can use the current fuel delivery infrastructure. The down side: the process to produce the fuels is much more complex than either petroleum or ethanol production, requiring the conversion of the biomass to bio-oil before the refining process can begin. Researchers are working to simplify the solution, but it'll still be a few years before there'll be a bountiful supply of biogas– at least the kind that isn't produced by a diet of burritos and beer.

Industrialinfo.com [sub] reports that China's National Development and Reform Commission (NDRC) has approved three biodiesel plants to convert tung tree nuts into fuel. For those in love with Google Earth, the plants will open in Nanchong (Sichuan province), Guizhou province and Beijing (Hainan province). The "demonstration projects" are set to yield just 50 – 60k tons of fuel per year apiece. To put that into perspective… "As a large diesel consumer, China's annual diesel consumption is about 70 million metric tons per year. Of this, about one-third of the consumption is from import. Based on the estimate of the International Energy Agency, China is the second largest petroleum consumer in the world and has a growing reliance on imported petroleum." Tung tree oil is a beloved sealant amongst kitchen remodelers and woodworkers. But don't get to thinking the U.S. could go cuckoo for tung nuts. Florida's experiment with the plants didn't pan out; vernicia fordii is now considered an invasive species. Oh, and even the smell of tung oil is enough to give nut-aversive people a severe reaction. The stuff we learn on your behalf…

According to the The Guardian, a [formerly] secret study completed by the World Bank has concluded biofuels are responsible for \75 percent of the recent run-up in world food prices. [A yet-to-be-released British Study reportedly came to the same conclusion, contradicting a U.S. government study concluding that food-for-fuel accounted for just two to three percent of that increase,] According to the British newspaper, the World Bank withheld the study to avoid embarrassing President Bush and the U.S. Government at next week's [non-Pontiac] G8 summit, at which Uncle Sam has full veto powers (sort of like Ford Motor Company and the few fortunate recipients of Crazy Henry's genes.) Leaders at the summit will be under pressure to cut back their biofuels mandates to avoid worsening the ongoing food shortage, which has been called "the first real economic crisis of globalization." The truth will out?