In the News
Nov 21, 2014
By Laura Barron-Lopez
The Environmental Protection Agency on Friday said it is holding off on the final rule for standards that tell refiners how much ethanol and other biofuels must be blended into the nation’s fuel supply.
The announcement comes as the White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB) ran out the 90-day clock to review the agency’s proposed standards, which for the first time signaled a retreat by the EPA on the amount of biofuels that must be blended.
“EPA issued a notice announcing that it will not be finalizing 2014 volume standards under the Renewable Fuel Standard program before the end of 2014,” an EPA official said on Friday.
The agency added that the proposal received a “significant number” of comments, specifically on “the proposal’s ability to ensure continued progress toward achieving the law’s renewable fuel targets.”
“Due to the delay in finalizing the standards for 2014, and given ongoing consideration of the issues presented by the commenters, the agency intends to take action on the 2014 standards rule in 2015,” the official said.
The proposal, which was first released in November of last year, pleased the oil industry, which argues more biofuels harms equipment, and cars, and causes a “blend wall” to be hit.
As the proposed rule reached the OMB earlier this year, however, White House officials and the EPA continued to signal that the numbers were going to change, and to the benefit of biofuel producers, who argued the lower levels in the initial proposal would put a damper on growth in the industry.
The EPA said on Friday that it hopes to “get back on” an annual schedule for 2014, 2015, and 2016 standards in the next year.
Industry groups on both sides were enraged by Friday’s delay.
The National Biodiesel Board, which is in favor of the standards and wants higher blend levels, scolded the administration.
"This Administration says over and over that it supports biodiesel, yet its actions with these repeated delays are undermining the industry,” said Anne Steckel, president of federal affairs for the board.
“Biodiesel producers have laid off workers and idled production. Some have shut down altogether. We are urging the Administration to finalize a 2014 rule as quickly as possible that puts this industry back on track for growth and puts our country back on track for ending our dangerous dependence on oil,” Steckel added.
The American Fuel and Petrochemical Manufacturers (AFPM) filed a notice of intent to sue the agency on Friday for not releasing a final rule.
"The fact that EPA proposed the 2014 standards over a year ago, and now 2014 is almost over, is another reason why Congress needs to step in and repeal or significantly reform this badly broken program,” said Charles Drevna, president of AFPM.
Read the original story here : EPA Punts Renewable Fuel Mandate Decision
Nov 18, 2014
By Logan Wroge
As Minnesota lawmakers push for the use of alternative fuel, some say progress should be quicker.
Changes to biofuel requirements and electric vehicle charging rates have led Minnesota’s efforts to increase alternative fuel consumption, but environmental advocates say more action is needed.
“A token amount of renewable energy isn’t going to cut it. We need a total transition,” said Simone Childs-Walker, a member of the student group Fossil Free Minnesota.
The Legislative Energy Commission met on Thursday to discuss alternative fuel sources.
Commission co-chair Sen. John Marty, DFL-Roseville, said at the meeting that Minnesota’s efforts have mostly centered on ethanol in the past.
Some say fuel sources like hydrogen or clean, renewable energy for electric vehicles offer a better solution than ethanol-based products.
University of Minnesota mechanical engineering assistant professor Will Northrop spoke at the meeting about the possibility of powering automobiles with hydrogen.
A tank of hydrogen fuel will take a vehicle about as far as a traditional gas-powered engine but is better for the environment, Northrop said.
But funding the research and infrastructure to support those vehicles, such as hydrogen-capable fueling stations, is one of the biggest disadvantages to the technology, Northrop said.
“[Hydrogen vehicles] are going to require a little bit more oomph from regulators and governments, essentially, to allow the infrastructure to happen,” he said.
Other alternative energy areas have seen more progress than hydrogen.
Among other legislative initiatives, a new state law in July bumped the amount of biofuel — fuel sourced from organic matter — required in diesel fuel from 5 percent to 10 percent.
“I would be surprised to see internal-combustion engine cars burning gasoline as a primary thing in a couple of decades,” Marty said.
Childs-Walker said she thinks the Legislature could be doing more to encourage alternative fuel and reduce carbon emissions.
As the Legislature aims to increase alternative fuel, the University has taken steps in this direction as well.
The University purchased its first hybrid car in 2001 and now has 68 hybrid vehicles in its fleet, Joseph Dahip, interim assistant director of the University’s Parking and Transportation Services, said in an email.
And 414 of the roughly 900 total vehicles in the fleet can run off E85 fuel, Dahip said.
University filling stations supplied 73,603 gallons of E85 to the fleet in the most recent fiscal year, Dahip said.
Fossil Free Minnesota would still like to see more change. The group is asking the University to divest its assets in the fossil fuel industry, Childs-Walker said.
Marty said he would like to see more emphasis on fuel produced in Minnesota, increasing employment
opportunities for the state.
“You’re buying your power from somebody producing electric power through wind generation in Minnesota,” Marty said. “That’s Minnesota jobs for Minnesota businesses.”
Although gas prices have been dropping, many agree that alternative fuel is critical to the state’s future.
“Gas is not going to be cheap forever,” Northrop said.
Read the original story here : Advocates : Minnesota Needs More Alternative Fuel
By Rep. Tim Walz
Nov 17, 2014
WASHINGTON — Imagine a future where America controls its own energy destiny — a future in which we stop spending $1 billion per day on foreign oil and start investing those funds to rebuild our crumbling infrastructure and help pay down the debt, all while creating well-paying American jobs and growing our economy at home.
While this might seem like a faraway dream, there are measures already in place that will help wean us off foreign oil. The Renewable Fuel Standard is one such measure, and we must oppose attempts to reduce or eliminate this job-creating initiative that reduces our dependence on foreign oil.
The RFS, first introduced in 2005 and reauthorized in 2007, could be the most significant program ever established toward achieving energy independence. It garnered overwhelming support in both the House and Senate, as well as the signature of President George W. Bush, a former oilman from Texas. The RFS has helped employers create thousands of jobs and jump-started local economies throughout the country.
In the ethanol industry alone, the RFS contributed to nearly 400,000 American jobs, bringing in more than $44 billion in economic activity. Today there are at least 212 ethanol biorefineries across the country and new biofuel production facilities are in the works that will create even more jobs.
The economic benefits of the RFS are significant; even more noteworthy is that we have managed to achieve these benefits, while at the same time lessening our dependence on foreign oil. Instead of sending our hard-earned dollars out of the country to buy fossil fuels, we are drawing investments from countries across the globe interested in supporting a renewable economic success story. In fact, since the creation of the RFS in 2005, America’s dependence on foreign oil has dropped by about 50 percent.
Opponents of the RFS would like you to believe the program was crafted by narrow special interests, designed to increase food prices and corrode your car engine. These claims are false, and I would like to set the record straight.
Opposition to the RFS is led by the same interests that have a bottom line impacted by decreased fossil fuel consumption. The opposition likes to argue that the RFS is responsible for increases in livestock feed prices, corn prices and food prices. This is a blatantly false claim. Regardless of the fact that only 17.5 percent of the corn crop actually goes toward creating biofuels, a 2013 World Bank study found that the main cause of increased global food prices is rising energy costs, not the use of corn to produce ethanol. Furthermore, only the starch of the corn is required for biofuel production and, once it is acquired, the protein, fiber and oil of the corn are all returned and made into animal feed supply.
Lastly, the price of corn is dropping, not rising. The U.S. Department of Agriculture is projecting the average 2014 to '15 price of corn at $3.50 per bushel, a 21 percent drop from 2013 to '14 and a 49 percent drop from 2012 to '13. So while the cost of corn drops exponentially, opponents of the RFS still blame the standard for increasing the cost of corn. It makes no sense.
Another claim that you will hear from the opposition is that ethanol, as a result of the RFS volume requirements, is a danger to your car’s engine. Again, this is patently false. Ethanol in cars is not a new development. In fact, it’s been around for more than 100 years. In 1908 Henry Ford designed the Model-T to run on ethanol. Since 2010 virtually all fuel pumped in the U.S. is 10 percent ethanol (E-10), and cars have been running just fine.
But don’t just take my word for it, take that of automotive professionals. NASCAR switched to E-15 (15 percent ethanol-blended fuel) almost five years ago. Its drivers have driven millions of miles in the most punishing automotive conditions since that time. Rather than breakdowns, they have reported performance increases; 20 percent fewer emissions with a 9 to 12 horse-power increase. In fact, Dale Earnhardt Jr. called the transition “seamless.”
The RFS is working to create jobs, reinvigorate local economies and reduce our dependence on foreign oil. We need to be sure to keep it that way. That is why I oppose any short-sighted attempts to reduce or eliminate this important, all-American energy promoting program.
Read the original story here : Fuel Standard Good For US Economy
WASHINGTON — Imagine a future where America controls its own energy destiny — a future in which we stop spending $1 billion per day on foreign oil and start investing those funds to rebuild our crumbling infrastructure and help pay down the debt, all while creating well-paying American jobs and growing our economy at home.
While this might seem like a faraway dream, there are measures already in place that will help wean us off foreign oil. The Renewable Fuel Standard is one such measure, and we must oppose attempts to reduce or eliminate this job-creating initiative that reduces our dependence on foreign oil.
The RFS, first introduced in 2005 and reauthorized in 2007, could be the most significant program ever established toward achieving energy independence. It garnered overwhelming support in both the House and Senate, as well as the signature of President George W. Bush, a former oilman from Texas. The RFS has helped employers create thousands of jobs and jump-started local economies throughout the country.
In the ethanol industry alone, the RFS contributed to nearly 400,000 American jobs, bringing in more than $44 billion in economic activity. Today there are at least 212 ethanol biorefineries across the country and new biofuel production facilities are in the works that will create even more jobs.
The economic benefits of the RFS are significant; even more noteworthy is that we have managed to achieve these benefits, while at the same time lessening our dependence on foreign oil. Instead of sending our hard-earned dollars out of the country to buy fossil fuels, we are drawing investments from countries across the globe interested in supporting a renewable economic success story. In fact, since the creation of the RFS in 2005, America’s dependence on foreign oil has dropped by about 50 percent.
Opponents of the RFS would like you to believe the program was crafted by narrow special interests, designed to increase food prices and corrode your car engine. These claims are false, and I would like to set the record straight.
Opposition to the RFS is led by the same interests that have a bottom line impacted by decreased fossil fuel consumption. The opposition likes to argue that the RFS is responsible for increases in livestock feed prices, corn prices and food prices. This is a blatantly false claim. Regardless of the fact that only 17.5 percent of the corn crop actually goes toward creating biofuels, a 2013 World Bank study found that the main cause of increased global food prices is rising energy costs, not the use of corn to produce ethanol. Furthermore, only the starch of the corn is required for biofuel production and, once it is acquired, the protein, fiber and oil of the corn are all returned and made into animal feed supply.
Lastly, the price of corn is dropping, not rising. The U.S. Department of Agriculture is projecting the average 2014 to '15 price of corn at $3.50 per bushel, a 21 percent drop from 2013 to '14 and a 49 percent drop from 2012 to '13. So while the cost of corn drops exponentially, opponents of the RFS still blame the standard for increasing the cost of corn. It makes no sense.
Another claim that you will hear from the opposition is that ethanol, as a result of the RFS volume requirements, is a danger to your car’s engine. Again, this is patently false. Ethanol in cars is not a new development. In fact, it’s been around for more than 100 years. In 1908 Henry Ford designed the Model-T to run on ethanol. Since 2010 virtually all fuel pumped in the U.S. is 10 percent ethanol (E-10), and cars have been running just fine.
But don’t just take my word for it, take that of automotive professionals. NASCAR switched to E-15 (15 percent ethanol-blended fuel) almost five years ago. Its drivers have driven millions of miles in the most punishing automotive conditions since that time. Rather than breakdowns, they have reported performance increases; 20 percent fewer emissions with a 9 to 12 horse-power increase. In fact, Dale Earnhardt Jr. called the transition “seamless.”
The RFS is working to create jobs, reinvigorate local economies and reduce our dependence on foreign oil. We need to be sure to keep it that way. That is why I oppose any short-sighted attempts to reduce or eliminate this important, all-American energy promoting program.
- See more at: http://www.agweek.com/event/article/id/24438/#sthash.gvNAUCLt.dpufWASHINGTON — Imagine a future where America controls its own energy destiny — a future in which we stop spending $1 billion per day on foreign oil and start investing those funds to rebuild our crumbling infrastructure and help pay down the debt, all while creating well-paying American jobs and growing our economy at home.
While this might seem like a faraway dream, there are measures already in place that will help wean us off foreign oil. The Renewable Fuel Standard is one such measure, and we must oppose attempts to reduce or eliminate this job-creating initiative that reduces our dependence on foreign oil.
The RFS, first introduced in 2005 and reauthorized in 2007, could be the most significant program ever established toward achieving energy independence. It garnered overwhelming support in both the House and Senate, as well as the signature of President George W. Bush, a former oilman from Texas. The RFS has helped employers create thousands of jobs and jump-started local economies throughout the country.
In the ethanol industry alone, the RFS contributed to nearly 400,000 American jobs, bringing in more than $44 billion in economic activity. Today there are at least 212 ethanol biorefineries across the country and new biofuel production facilities are in the works that will create even more jobs.
The economic benefits of the RFS are significant; even more noteworthy is that we have managed to achieve these benefits, while at the same time lessening our dependence on foreign oil. Instead of sending our hard-earned dollars out of the country to buy fossil fuels, we are drawing investments from countries across the globe interested in supporting a renewable economic success story. In fact, since the creation of the RFS in 2005, America’s dependence on foreign oil has dropped by about 50 percent.
Opponents of the RFS would like you to believe the program was crafted by narrow special interests, designed to increase food prices and corrode your car engine. These claims are false, and I would like to set the record straight.
Opposition to the RFS is led by the same interests that have a bottom line impacted by decreased fossil fuel consumption. The opposition likes to argue that the RFS is responsible for increases in livestock feed prices, corn prices and food prices. This is a blatantly false claim. Regardless of the fact that only 17.5 percent of the corn crop actually goes toward creating biofuels, a 2013 World Bank study found that the main cause of increased global food prices is rising energy costs, not the use of corn to produce ethanol. Furthermore, only the starch of the corn is required for biofuel production and, once it is acquired, the protein, fiber and oil of the corn are all returned and made into animal feed supply.
Lastly, the price of corn is dropping, not rising. The U.S. Department of Agriculture is projecting the average 2014 to '15 price of corn at $3.50 per bushel, a 21 percent drop from 2013 to '14 and a 49 percent drop from 2012 to '13. So while the cost of corn drops exponentially, opponents of the RFS still blame the standard for increasing the cost of corn. It makes no sense.
Another claim that you will hear from the opposition is that ethanol, as a result of the RFS volume requirements, is a danger to your car’s engine. Again, this is patently false. Ethanol in cars is not a new development. In fact, it’s been around for more than 100 years. In 1908 Henry Ford designed the Model-T to run on ethanol. Since 2010 virtually all fuel pumped in the U.S. is 10 percent ethanol (E-10), and cars have been running just fine.
But don’t just take my word for it, take that of automotive professionals. NASCAR switched to E-15 (15 percent ethanol-blended fuel) almost five years ago. Its drivers have driven millions of miles in the most punishing automotive conditions since that time. Rather than breakdowns, they have reported performance increases; 20 percent fewer emissions with a 9 to 12 horse-power increase. In fact, Dale Earnhardt Jr. called the transition “seamless.”
The RFS is working to create jobs, reinvigorate local economies and reduce our dependence on foreign oil. We need to be sure to keep it that way. That is why I oppose any short-sighted attempts to reduce or eliminate this important, all-American energy promoting program.
- See more at: http://www.agweek.com/event/article/id/24438/#sthash.gvNAUCLt.dpufWASHINGTON — Imagine a future where America controls its own energy destiny — a future in which we stop spending $1 billion per day on foreign oil and start investing those funds to rebuild our crumbling infrastructure and help pay down the debt, all while creating well-paying American jobs and growing our economy at home.
While this might seem like a faraway dream, there are measures already in place that will help wean us off foreign oil. The Renewable Fuel Standard is one such measure, and we must oppose attempts to reduce or eliminate this job-creating initiative that reduces our dependence on foreign oil.
The RFS, first introduced in 2005 and reauthorized in 2007, could be the most significant program ever established toward achieving energy independence. It garnered overwhelming support in both the House and Senate, as well as the signature of President George W. Bush, a former oilman from Texas. The RFS has helped employers create thousands of jobs and jump-started local economies throughout the country.
In the ethanol industry alone, the RFS contributed to nearly 400,000 American jobs, bringing in more than $44 billion in economic activity. Today there are at least 212 ethanol biorefineries across the country and new biofuel production facilities are in the works that will create even more jobs.
The economic benefits of the RFS are significant; even more noteworthy is that we have managed to achieve these benefits, while at the same time lessening our dependence on foreign oil. Instead of sending our hard-earned dollars out of the country to buy fossil fuels, we are drawing investments from countries across the globe interested in supporting a renewable economic success story. In fact, since the creation of the RFS in 2005, America’s dependence on foreign oil has dropped by about 50 percent.
Opponents of the RFS would like you to believe the program was crafted by narrow special interests, designed to increase food prices and corrode your car engine. These claims are false, and I would like to set the record straight.
Opposition to the RFS is led by the same interests that have a bottom line impacted by decreased fossil fuel consumption. The opposition likes to argue that the RFS is responsible for increases in livestock feed prices, corn prices and food prices. This is a blatantly false claim. Regardless of the fact that only 17.5 percent of the corn crop actually goes toward creating biofuels, a 2013 World Bank study found that the main cause of increased global food prices is rising energy costs, not the use of corn to produce ethanol. Furthermore, only the starch of the corn is required for biofuel production and, once it is acquired, the protein, fiber and oil of the corn are all returned and made into animal feed supply.
Lastly, the price of corn is dropping, not rising. The U.S. Department of Agriculture is projecting the average 2014 to '15 price of corn at $3.50 per bushel, a 21 percent drop from 2013 to '14 and a 49 percent drop from 2012 to '13. So while the cost of corn drops exponentially, opponents of the RFS still blame the standard for increasing the cost of corn. It makes no sense.
Another claim that you will hear from the opposition is that ethanol, as a result of the RFS volume requirements, is a danger to your car’s engine. Again, this is patently false. Ethanol in cars is not a new development. In fact, it’s been around for more than 100 years. In 1908 Henry Ford designed the Model-T to run on ethanol. Since 2010 virtually all fuel pumped in the U.S. is 10 percent ethanol (E-10), and cars have been running just fine.
But don’t just take my word for it, take that of automotive professionals. NASCAR switched to E-15 (15 percent ethanol-blended fuel) almost five years ago. Its drivers have driven millions of miles in the most punishing automotive conditions since that time. Rather than breakdowns, they have reported performance increases; 20 percent fewer emissions with a 9 to 12 horse-power increase. In fact, Dale Earnhardt Jr. called the transition “seamless.”
The RFS is working to create jobs, reinvigorate local economies and reduce our dependence on foreign oil. We need to be sure to keep it that way. That is why I oppose any short-sighted attempts to reduce or eliminate this important, all-American energy promoting program.
- See more at: http://www.agweek.com/event/article/id/24438/#sthash.gvNAUCLt.dpufNational Association Of Convenience Stores
Nov 13, 2014
ALEXANDRIA, Va. – There are opportunities to grow the E85 market — but only if E85 prices remain significantly below those of regular grade gasoline and the automobile industry continues to produce flex-fuel vehicles at historic rates, according to a new report released yesterday by the Fuels Institute.
Depending upon the likelihood of various scenarios, E85 sales will, at a minimum, double by 2023 — but could experience a 20-fold increase in sales over the same time period, according to the 40-page report, “E85: A Market Performance Analysis and Forecast.”
The report was commissioned to examine the current performance of E85 in the market and the prospects for its expansion. Researchers evaluated the performance of more than 300 stores that sell E85 and developed forecasts taking into account a variety of factors that could ultimately affect sales. Factoring in past retail sales data, consumer trends, vehicles sales and a variety of possible scenarios, the Fuels Institute projects that E85 sales will increase from 196 million gallons in 2013 to between 400 million and 4.4 billion gallons in 2023.
“This report is essential reading for federal regulators who are considering strategies to meet the goals of the Renewable Fuel Standard and for fuel marketers seeking options to diversify their product offer,” said Fuels Institute Executive Director John Eichberger. “It presents an objective analysis of the overall market for E85, including actual retail sales data, and represents a collective effort to identify opportunities and challenges facing this alternative fuel — without taking a position of advocacy.”
Biofuels have experienced remarkable growth over the past 12 years, from 1.75 billion gallons sold in 2001 to 14.54 billion gallons sold in 2013. The vast majority of this growth is from ethanol, particularly E10 fuel that is ubiquitous in most of the country. However, additional E10 sales are constrained by the size of the gasoline market, which has declined since 2007. Therefore, future biofuels sales growth will be highly dependent upon increasing the sale of higher grades of ethanol like E85, a blend of gasoline with 51% to 83% ethanol.
The growth of E85, also known as flex fuel, is heavily dependent upon increasing both the number of fueling stations providing E85 and the number of flex-fuel vehicles on the road. The report found that there is room for growth on both fronts.
One of the factors currently restricting E85 consumption is its relatively limited availability at retail. Only 2% of retail fueling locations offer E85 and 60% of these are located in just 10 states. In examining both vehicle registrations and station counts, the report found that there are 5,289 flex-fuel vehicles per E85 station, compared to just 1,466 light-duty vehicles per retail fueling station, indicating great potential for E85 retailers.
“Increasing the E85 station count would improve the potential for additional E85 sales and introduce additional competition to the market. But several other factors — including the relative price of E85 compared to unleaded gasoline and the number of vehicles on the road that can operate on E85 — must also be evaluated to determine the potential E85 market, especially because flex-fuel vehicles can operate on either E85 or gasoline,” said Eichberger.
The price that E85 is sold relative to gasoline will play a significant role in flex fuel’s growth. Because E85 contains approximately 23% less energy per gallon than regular grade gasoline, consumer demand will be heavily dependent upon E85’s price discount relative to gasoline. The report found that consumers seem to be much more concerned about absolute price differential than the percent differential, with 60 cents per gallon being the optimum price differential to encourage flex fuel vehicle consumers to shift their purchases from unleaded to E85.
Further growth could be possible if the automobile industry continues to increase flex-fuel vehicle production at current rates, thereby generating increased potential demand.
Currently, flex fuel vehicles represent 6% of all light-duty vehicle registrations in the United States. The growth in flex-fuel vehicle production was significantly aided by credits given to automakers for producing these vehicles. However, under the new Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) regulations, this credit is set to expire. It remains to be seen if the automobile manufacturers continue producing flex-fuel vehicles at the current rate in the absence of this credit. It is likely that consumers will have to demonstrate their demand for flex-fuel vehicles to convince manfacturers to sustain or increase production levels.
“We developed this report in direct response to requests from multiple congressional committees to provide a comprehensive source for information about the market for E85. This objective analysis of E85 in the market and the range of its market potential is essential to provide guidance regarding the potential for E85 to meet the goals of the Renewable Fuel Standard,” said Eichberger.
Read Fuel Institute's full report here : E85 : A Market Performance Analysis And Forecast
Nov 12, 2014
By Erin Voegele
A group of agriculture organizations recently issued a letter to President Obama asking him to intervene in the U.S. EPA’s proposed cuts to the 2014 renewable fuel standard (RFS) volume obligations. The final 2014 RFS rule is expected to be released soon.
Within the letter, the agriculture organizations stress that the blending targets and methodology included in the proposed rule are already causing significant harm to the biofuel sector. “These impacts are reverberating throughout the U.S. agriculture economy, and we expect this trend to continue if the targets and the methodology in the rule are not corrected,” the groups wrote.
The letter also explains that the establishment of the RFS program sent a signal to rural America that agricultural producers are partners in the country’s efforts to enhance our energy security. According to the letter, that signal indicated that if the agriculture industry could innovate and identify new feedstocks for low-carbon cellulosic and advanced biofuels, enhance sustainability, and increase yields, those low-carbon fuels would be sold in the marketplace. While the American agriculture industry has responded to that signal, the letter notes the EPA’s 2014 RFS proposal diverges from the course that Congress laid out for the program.
Farmers doubled the yield of U.S. corn crops between 1980 and 2009 with only a 3 percent increase in acres. However, the contribution of farmers isn’t limited to corn production. “We’ve worked with advanced biofuel producers to identify new sources of feedstocks,” said the groups in the letter. “Using newly designed equipment, we’re harvesting corn stover from existing fields to feed low carbon cellulosic ethanol facilities. Across the country, farmers are finding new crops to drive our energy independence with investments in sorghum, barley, wheat, woody biomass, and other dedicated energy crops that will diversify our feedstock supply.”
The letter also stresses that the innovation pipeline is helping to drive an economic renaissance in rural America. “There are four commercial-scale cellulosic ethanol plants opening in 2014 alone, creating hundreds of new jobs in rural America,” wrote the groups in the letter. “Until the proposed rule was released, the cellulosic sector was poised for expansion. Yet, with the release of the EPA’s proposal, investments are now moving overseas as first movers like Abengoa attribute their decision to locate their next cellulosic facility in Brazil rather than the United States to the EPA’s proposed rule.”
The letter also addresses the impact on farm income, noting the net farm income forecast for 2013 was $131.3 billion. That number has fallen 14 percent, to its lowest level since 2010. “The EPA’s proposed policy decision is driving one of key economic engines—the biofuel sector—overseas,” said the letter. “We have invested in response to the signals in the RFS and are poised to deliver the very low carbon fuels you have sought for so long. Instead of reaping the economic benefits of this investment with a build-out of a domestic biofuel industry, the methodology proposed by EPA is offshoring the industry—and our market. This is a decision we cannot afford in America’s heartland. We urge you to ensure the EPA modifies this damaging rule.”
The letter was signed by the National Corn Growers Association, the National Association of Wheat Growers, the National Sorghum Producers, the American Farm Bureau Federation, National Farmers Union, the Association of Equipment Manufacturers and Agricultural Retailers Association. A full copy of the letter can be downloaded from the NCGA website.
The EPA is now nearly a year behind its statutory deadline for issuing the final 2014 RFS volume obligations. Under the RFS program, the EPA is technically required to issue final volume obligations for a particular year by Nov. 30 of the preceding year. For the 2014 RFS, that deadline would have been Nov. 30, 2013. The EPA published its proposed rule for the 2014 RFS in mid-November last year. The comment period on the proposed rule closed Jan. 28. On Aug. 22, the EPA delivered the final rule to the White House Office of Management and Budget for review. That process is currently ongoing. The EPA’s Regulatory Development and Retrospective Review Tracker currently indicates the final rule is expected to be published in the Federal Register in November.
Read the original story here : Ags Group Advocate For The RFS In Letter To Obama
Nov 10, 2014
By Holly Jessen
After writing many articles about corn-ethanol producers working to improve energy efficiency, reduce water use and implement new technologies to make their plants run better and more profitably, there’s no doubt in my mind that I’m covering an industry that’s always moving forward. Not everybody realizes this.
To some people, the two words corn and ethanol put together brings up some pretty strong negative connotations. The attitude seems to be, yes, sure, the cellulosic ethanol industry is working toward some great things but won’t it be nice when we can just get rid of those awful corn ethanol plants? I’ve written about this before but it’s worth repeating. The second generation advanced ethanol industry is coming about because of work done by the first generation gran-based ethanol industry and it’s not an either/or equation. Both types of ethanol production facilities can and will coexist in the future. Here are a few examples of exciting things going on at corn-ethanol plants that we covered at our website recently.
Aemetis Advanced Fuels Keyes Inc., a 60 MMgy corn and milo ethanol plant in California, recently revealed its plans to capture and sell CO2. In real estate it’s all about location, location, location but in the ethanol industry coproduct diversification is a key to profitability. Clearly location comes into play in the ethanol industry too but here we have a destination ethanol plant making it work with new coproducts as part of the mix.
In late October, ICM Inc. announced that it had reached an agreement with Patriot Renewable Fuels LLC for engineering and design work at the 110 MMgy ethanol plant in Annawan, Illinois. Patriot’s board members will use that information to evaluate two of ICM’s patent-pending technologies, one for fiber separation and a second for cellulosic ethanol production from corn fiber, considering a possible construction start in 2015, according to an ICM press release. While it’s not finalized yet that the facility will for sure produce cellulosic ethanol from corn fiber, it’s certainly an exciting step forward!
It feels a little bit like back in the early corn oil days. First just a few innovative ethanol plants started adding corn oil extraction technology. Then we hit a tipping point where more plants jumped on the corn oil bandwagon. Today, only a small percentage of ethanol plants don’t count corn oil as a coproduct. Maybe someday we’ll be in the same place with cellulosic ethanol production from corn fiber.
The last innovation I’ll highlight is Green Plains Renewable Energy’s work in the area of algae production. During the company’s third quarter earnings call in late October, Todd Becker, president and CEO, said Green Plains had recently completed some fish feed trials that had good results. He added that while algae can be used to produce many possible products, the company is focused on making sure it can be done profitably. Green Plains is definitely an example of a corn-ethanol production company that hasn’t been simply satisfied with the status quo.
I know there are many other examples of innovative work going on in the first generation industry but these are three that came up recently in news posted to our website. So today I’m taking the opportunity to pat Aemetis, Patriot Renewable Fuels and Green Plains on the back. We at Ethanol Producer Magazine are excited to continue covering these, and other projects, as they take the corn-ethanol industry closer and closer to what Feike Sijbesma, Royal DSM’s CEO and board chairman, refered to as the biorenewable age, at the grand opening ceremony of Poet-DSM's cellulosic ethanol plant co-located with a corn-ethanol plant.
Read the original story here : Innovation, improvement in the corn-ethanol industry
Nov 5, 2014
By Daniel Looker
Bruce Braley the Iowa Democrat who lost his bid to be a U.S. Senator Tuesday, famously told a group of lawyers in Texas that if Republicans gained control of the Senate, the next chair of the Judiciary committee would be “a farmer from Iowa,” Senator Chuck Grassley. The video clip of that comment, played often in attack ads, may have doomed his chances of winning against Iowa’s new Republican Senator-elect, Joni Ernst.
Maybe Braley should have pointed out that the next chair of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee is likely to be Senator James Inhofe, an Oklahoma Republican who is a strong critic of the renewable fuel standard. Last year Inhofe called for “Repealing Obama’s Ethanol Mandate.”
So, does the shift in power in the Senate mean that corn-based ethanol will be weakened?
Those who lead the nation’s three leading ethanol groups don’t think so, but they’re hardly complacent, either.
“I don’t think it has that much impact at all,” Bob Dinneen, president of the Renewable Fuels Association in Washington said of the election results Wednesday. “The mathematics of ethanol hasn’t changed.”
“They’ll still need 60 votes on the floor of the Senate to repeal the Renewable Fuel Standard,” he told Agriculture.com. That’s the number needed to break a filibuster that would block any legislation to repeal the RFS. The Democrats, who control the Senate until next year, don’t have 60 votes. And, even after Tuesday’s wave election, Republicans won’t have a 60-vote majority in 2015.
Dinneen points out that new senators from Colorado, Nebraska, Iowa and South Dakota are all supporters of ethanol, as are GOP veterans from the Midwest, Senators John Thune of South Dakota and Grassley from Iowa.
“These folks will come to town and support the Grassleys and John Thunes of the world,” Dinneen said.
Dinneen added that the first RFS passed in an energy bill in 2005 was under a Republican President, George W. Bush, and Republican Congress. The 2007 energy bill, which created a larger mandate for biofuels in its RFS, passed when Bush was still in office and after Democrats had taken control of the Senate.
Brian Jennings, executive vice president of the American Coalition for Ethanol in Sioux Falls, South Dakota, agrees that ethanol’s support is bipartisan.
“I’m going back to the principal that has been true for ethanol forever, that ethanol has been a bipartisan issue,” Jennings said Wednesday. “We expect that this remaining bipartisan support will keep big oil from reducing or eliminating the RFS.”
That doesn’t mean ethanol groups won’t be busy. Under Republican leadership in the House of Representatives, committees have held hearings that featured oil industry critics of the RFS and members from both parties backed bills to weaken the RFS that ultimately went nowhere.
Both Dinneen and Jennings expect Inhofe to hold hearings attacking the RFS.
Like many issues in agriculture, support or opposition to the RFS is regional, with critics coming from oil states like Oklahoma, or Texas and Virginia, where cattle feeders and poultry producers have blamed the mandate for creating high prices for corn – when prices were high.
Jennings believes that the development of cellulosic ethanol could expand that regional support for biofuels.
“Hopefully, what we can do is expand that playing field so that other members of the country join that bipartisan caucus” that supports ethanol, he said.
Another factor that could moderate efforts to repeal the RFS is that the new Senate Majority Leader, Mitch McConnell will be under pressure to pass legislation, Dinneen said. That includes other measures desired by the oil industry, such as the Keystone XL pipeline to bring Canadian crude to the U.S. Gulf, and ending the U.S. ban on domestic crude oil exports. McConnell has a better chance of doing that if he leaves out an issue as divisive as repeal of the RFS, Dinneen said.
Jennings pointed out that the views of some of the successful candidates for the Senate “have offered a range of responses when it comes to the RFS.”
Ernst, for example, told The Des Moines Register last spring that philosophically she opposes mandates and government subsidies, but her campaign responded to criticism from Braley by pointing out that Ernst, as a member of the Iowa Senate, voted to support the RFS. (The Iowa legislature doesn’t control the RFS, of course, but was part of a strong Midwest campaign against an EPA proposal to weaken the ethanol mandate in the RFS.) Ernst has pledged to continue to “passionately defend the RFS in the U.S. Senate.”
Jennings said citizens need to make sure campaign promises are kept.
“Now is the time we have to hold newly-elected officials accountable for the promises made on the campaign trail,” he said.”In other words, I don’t think anyone should be complacent.”
Tom Buis, CEO of Growth Energy, another ethanol group, agrees that “biofuels policy is bipartisan and always has been.”
But he also looks for more pressure on ethanol in the Senate – not from new Republicans from midwestern states, but some of the new senators from other regions who got backing from the oil industry.
“Oil doesn’t invest all this money in these campaigns out of the goodness of their hearts,” Buis said.
The change in leadership of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee to ethanol foe Inhofe is dramatic. Its chair under the Democrats, Senator Barbara Boxer of California, said “that as long as she held this gavel, there will be no changes to the RFS,” Buis recalled.
In the new Senate, “we expect there to be attempts [to weaken the RFS]. Whether any succeed, I highly doubt it,” Buis said.
Ethanol’s strongest support may be in the Corn Belt, but Buis pointed out that “we have supporters on both coasts as well as the Midwest.”
“We don’t think we had any net losses in the Senate – if they had a vote on the RFS,” Buis said of the tally of supporters.
Read the original story here : Will Ethanol Ride The GOP Wave?
Nov 4, 2014
By John Davis
A new paper from automotive engineers shows how the federal government has a bias toward Big Oil. Officials from the American Coalition for Ethanol (ACE) praised a new Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) paper authored by experts from Ford Motor Company, General Motors Company, and AVL Powertrain Engineering Inc. that concludes that emissions from higher ethanol blends are cleaner than gasoline, and the approach used by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to estimate exhaust emissions, the Motor Vehicle Emissions Simulator (MOVES) model, is biased in favor of oil.
“We applaud these Ford, General Motors, and AVL Powertrain engineers for exposing that EPA’s MOVES model is biased in favor of a result oil companies prefer and ignores the way gasoline is blended with ethanol in the real-world,” said [ACE Executive Vice President Brian] Jennings. “This is just the latest example of how Big Oil is twisting EPA’s arm to limit ethanol use. First, it appears EPA is about to completely rewrite the Renewable Fuel Standard to help oil companies avoid their legal responsibility to blend fuels, like E15 and E85, which reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Now, EPA is relying on a biased approach for estimating tailpipe emissions, remarkably making gasoline appear cleaner than ethanol.”
Theoretically, there are two ways to blend ethanol with gasoline to formulate fuel. The universal approach used to make nearly all U.S. gasoline (which is E10) is to mix additional ethanol or “splash blend” ethanol to a clearly-defined and consistent gasoline blendstock. The second approach, which EPA is following in the MOVES model, assumes oil companies will take advantage of the higher octane and oxygen content of ethanol and create an even lower-quality gasoline blendstock containing additional pollutants, resulting in a finished ethanol-gasoline blend that is dirtier than E10. That process, identified by the erroneously benign term “match blending,” allows oil companies to use carcinogenic hydrocarbons, so that no matter how much ethanol is added to the final product, the “allowable” base petroleum blendstock results in more tailpipe pollution.
The SAE paper says “the degradation of emissions which can result (from match-blending) is primarily due to the added hydrocarbons, but has often been incorrectly attributed to the ethanol.”
ACE also says the report shows that “blending ethanol at up to 30 percent by volume with an E10 blendstock should generally require only minimal changes in composition to meet ASTM D4814,” the standard specification for automotive engine fuel.
Read the original story here : Ethanol Coalition : Auto Engineers Expose EPA's Oil Bias
More...
Nov 3, 2014
By Solenis
WILMINGTON, Del. (Nov. 03, 2014) – After bringing corn oil extraction aids to the market four years ago and proving they could help fuel ethanol producers capture up to three times more corn oil, Solenis has received a U.S. patent (Patent No. US 8,841,469 B2) for the use of chemical additives to improve the separation of corn oil in the ethanol production process. The innovative manufacturer of specialty chemicals for the biorefining, chemical processing, oil and gas, and other markets had first filed a provisional U.S. patent in March 2011 for the corn oil extraction method. The U.S. patent was issued to Solenis on September 23, 2014.
The awarding of this patent means Solenis has the right to exclude others from practicing or inducing others to practice the corn oil extraction method in the United States. The patent also covers the use of variations of the chemical additives referenced in the patent.
In addition to yielding more corn oil, Solenis’ extraction aids, which are marketed as Dimension™ corn oil extraction aids, also reduce solids in the oil, resulting in a cleaner, higher-quality oil. The extraction aids, which are easily introduced into the process, also have been shown to reduce system deposition, resulting in less downtime for system cleaning and maintenance.
“Our goal is always to drive the profitability of the companies we do business with – and our extraction aids do just that,” says Allen Ziegler, global marketing director of biorefining at Solenis. “We’re not a one-trick product company. We have a full line of products that can benefit our customers – from reducing costs to increasing productivity. On top of that, our process experts are always looking for innovative ways to further build efficiencies. It’s inherent in everything we do.”
Previously known as Ashland Water Technologies, Solenis was part of Ashland Inc. until earlier this year when it became a stand-alone company with a new name. Although the Solenis name and brand are new, the company is grounded in a strong 94-year heritage that includes previous companies Betz Laboratories, Drew, Stockhausen and Hercules. Its product portfolio includes a broad array of process, functional and water treatment chemistries as well as state-of-the-art monitoring and control systems.
Ziegler says that during the time period from Solenis filing for the patent to its receiving it, a number of companies began offering their own corn oil extraction aids, most of which utilize chemistries covered in Solenis’ patent. “The reality is that we were first to market with this technology and we have hard data to demonstrate its value, whereas with competitor products there can be significant variances in product performance.”
Now with the patent, all U.S. fuel ethanol plants will have access to Solenis’ high performance extraction aids, which are biodegradable and generally recognized as safe (GRAS) and include Kosher-certified products. Ziegler acknowledges that some plants may be concerned about Solenis’ supply capability and explains that Solenis has taken measures to address supply capacity to ensure uninterrupted delivery.
“Whether customers have a specially blended product or want validation that our technology works the same or better than what they’re currently using, we’ll work with them to get the product they need and the performance they expect,” Ziegler says. “We’re seeking to bring greater value to fuel ethanol plants with our patented and proven technology. But just as important, we want to establish good relationships with those companies.”
To learn more about Solenis, its innovative technologies and its latest patent, visit solenis.com/cornoilpatent
Nov 4, 2014
By Jacob Bunge
Archer Daniels Midland Co. expects its corn-based ethanol business to remain strong in the year ahead despite sliding energy prices that have cut into profit margins, executives said Tuesday.
Strong demand over the summer for ethanol and low corn prices translated to the best profit margins in years for U.S. ethanol makers, helping ADM—one of the world’s largest traders and processors of agricultural commodities—increase third-quarter profits by 60%.
Steady sales of the biofuel to gasoline blenders and the potential for a rise in exports next year suggest that business will remain brisk for domestic ethanol producers, ADM President Juan Luciano told analysts on a conference call.
“Corn-based ethanol is still the lowest-cost octane enhancer on the market, and exports remain strong,” he said, noting ethanol margins would be “a little bit lower” in the fourth quarter than in the third quarter.
Ethanol production helped ADM’s corn-processing division more than double profits to $363 million in the three months ended Sept. 30, the Chicago company said. ADM ranks among the biggest U.S. ethanol producers, processing corn into the fuel additive and selling a resulting byproduct as an animal feed ingredient.
ADM reported an overall profit of $747 million, or $1.14 a share, up from $476 million, or 72 cents a share, a year earlier. Excluding inventory-accounting adjustments, asset-sale gains and other items, earnings rose to 81 cents from 47 cents.
Revenue decreased 15% to $18.12 billion. The drop reflected lower sales in the company’s agricultural-services segment due to slower selling of crops by farmers in South America.
ADM shares climbed 5.2% to $49.69 in midday trading.
The end of the busy summer driving season and a broader drop in crude oil prices dented profit margins for the ethanol industry in September and raised questions about how it would fare if oil remains cheap for a long time. Enlarged U.S. supplies and declining demand have helped push crude oil prices about 22% lower this year. Gasoline and ethanol prices fell sharply as well.
However, another projected record U.S. corn harvest will keep the main ingredient for U.S. ethanol cheap going into next year, ADM officials said. The company sees potential to sell more ethanol abroad in countries like Mexico, Canada, the Middle East and Asia, with overall U.S. industry exports in 2015 anticipated to range from 800 million gallons—steady with this year’s projected sales—to as much as one billion gallons, Mr. Luciano told analysts.
Ethanol profit margins have improved in recent weeks despite a 15% slide in crude oil prices over the past month, as ethanol producers more quickly throttled back production to respond to weaker demand, ADM officials said.
“The industry’s behaving in a much better way this year than we saw last year,” said Mr. Luciano, who told analysts that ADM was planning for the possibility that oil prices will remain sharply lower in 2015.
ADM predicted a continued rebound in its grain-trading division, which buys crops from farmers and grain elevators, and sells them to food companies or foreign buyers. Anticipated record hauls of corn and soybeans in the U.S. helped boost profits in ADM’s agricultural services unit to $64 million in the third quarter from $4 million in the prior-year period. Near-record volumes of crops moved through ADM’s export terminals in the Gulf of Mexico in September as southern U.S. farmers brought in this year’s harvest, officials said.
Transport problems plaguing U.S. railways drove earnings in ADM’s logistics management unit two-thirds higher to $35 million in the third quarter. The company’s trucks and barges both benefited from increased demand, officials said.
ADM’s oilseeds-processing segment reported that its operating profit rose by $1 million to $362 million from a year earlier, with the impact from slower farmer selling in South America offset by stronger global soybean and biodiesel results.
Read the original story here : Archer Daniels Sees Corn-Based Ethanol Business Staying Strong
Nov 1, 2014
By David Fondler
To Randall Doyal, ethanol seems like a no-brainer: a renewable, domestically produced automotive fuel that reduces the need for imported oil; that burns clean, reducing harmful greenhouse gases and pollution; that boosts farmers and rural economies by creating jobs and raising land values.
And he's ready to face down the detractors -- those who say corn-based ethanol operates in an artificial market, with demand created by political fiat through fuel-blend mandates and engine-emission standards; that its production removes corn from the food chain, thus raising commodity prices; that at higher blends it can harm car engines.
The food-vs.-fuel debate has been going on for years, though ebbing somewhat recently with an abundant U.S. corn harvest and low prices and low inflation. Meanwhile, the development of so-called cellulosic ethanol, made from nonfood grass products, has been slow to develop.
Doyal runs Al-Corn Clean Fuel, a Claremont, Minn., farmer-owned co-op that produces 50 million gallons of ethanol a year. On Oct. 1, he became chairman of the Renewable Fuels Association, which lobbies for ethanol in Washington, D.C.
In a recent interview, Doyal described his organization and gave its side of some of the issues ethanol faces. His answers have been edited for context and clarity.
Tell us about the RFA and how you came to lead it.
"The RFA is our national ethanol organization based in Washington, D.C. It provides us with a person who can do lobbying on Capitol Hill, and it provides a focal point for our industry to get together to learn about policy, to have some effect or influence on what happens in Washington, and to keep ourselves advised of all the issues that affect our industry.
"It's funded by ethanol producers around the U.S., ethanol producers who are dues-paying members and have a seat on the board. After years of being on the board and doing various things for RFA, I was asked to serve on the executive committee, at one point was the treasurer; for the last couple of years was the vice chair, and was just elected chairman."
Does the RFA concern itself with other forms of renewable energy, say wind or solar, or do you solely advocate for automotive fuel?
"Correct. It has been historically the fuels industry, the renewable fuels industry in the U.S., which is primarily ethanol."
Do you see the industry moving away from using food stocks to produce fuel?
"We are really feed stock-neutral. The majority of the industry does utilize corn; we don't utilize food. There's a big difference between food and feed, and I would hope that this last year, when ethanol production has been high and corn prices have fallen, and food prices haven't done anything but go up, would kind of put the lie to that idea that there's a food-vs.-fuel debate that ought to be had. It's not that ethanol production influences the cost of food at all. Oil prices have more to do with that than anything else."
How does that work?
"Because of transportation costs, because of packaging, there's a lot more impact from the price of oil on food prices than anything else."
What about making ethanol from grass or other nonedible plant material? Will that ever go large-scale?
"We certainly think there's an opportunity there. There's a lot of work and research being done, but it's still a very fledgling industry and has a lot of need to grow. There's some recent opening of cellulosic plants that make this much more visible, but as an industry it's still very small compared to the potential for production and demand."
Do you think ethanol-blending mandates should be flexible, taking the price of corn into account, so as not to artificially raise the price in lean years?
"Within the renewable fuels standard, there is a mechanism to allow (the Environmental Protection Agency) to say there is an issue with the cost of corn, and it has more to do with availability than anything else.
"But as you can see right now, corn prices have fallen precipitously; supplies are way up. So thank goodness we've got an ethanol industry that's consuming some of that corn; it's providing some support."
But would your industry, and your market, even exist and compete if it weren't for the government mandates?
"Ethanol competes in the market today. We're selling ethanol below the price of gasoline. I think it's completely off base to think it's not competitive because there's a mandate. Frankly, we have a mandate in the U.S. for 90 percent gasoline, and it's time that we change that. We're producing a fuel that's cheaper, that's higher octane, that burns cleaner, that's renewable and that could displace petroleum."
What about the debate over whether car engines can be harmed by higher blends of ethanol in gas?
"E15 (a 15 percent blend of ethanol), according to EPA, can be run in any vehicle manufactured after the year 2001. Their concerns had to do more with emissions systems and catalytic converters, but it will operate with relatively no difference in performance, as far as the vehicle goes.
"There has been a tremendous amount of noise by folks who don't want to lose another 5 percent of the market share and have fought very hard to prevent acceptance of anything higher than E10."
You mean the oil companies?
"Yes. When we look around the country, there are folks who are adopting E15 or even higher blends, folks that are offering E20-30-40, but those fuels by law are only supposed to be introduced to vehicles that have flex-fuel engines in them, that are higher ethanol-compatible.
"Anyway, you see independents, those folks that are not part of any major oil company, starting to offer those. You see it around the Twin Cities, a new group that calls itself Minnoco, offering E15, and they're growing. But there's almost no E15 in stations that are controlled or owned by the major oil companies."
Do you see that changing? Say, ethanol producers partnering with oil companies to jointly market a product?
"I haven't seen much of that yet. I would certainly hold out hope for that to happen down the road, because, frankly, that's our customer, that's who we sell to. So we'd love to work together with them. It hasn't been a stellar relationship so far."
Ethanol previously has received a lot of bipartisan support in Washington. Do you see that waning at all?
"It's hard me to say what happens in Washington, because Washington seems to be such a dysfunctional place, but in terms of bipartisan support for the ethanol industry, I continue to see that as I go through the Midwest and talk to Midwest legislators; it really is a bipartisan issue for them, they get it and they understand."
Read the original story here : Ethanol Advocate Wants To Keep His Issue On The Front Burner
Oct 30, 2014
By Russell Hubbard
Green Plains Inc., whose shares have climbed 80 percent this year, told investors Wednesday that higher blends of ethanol are making it into the nation’s gas supply but that congested rail networks make it hard to get it out there.
“The last couple of weeks or so, we are seeing a significant degradation of service on several carriers,” Green Plains Chief Executive Todd Becker said on a conference call, discussing rail service and third-quarter earnings.
At the same time, gasoline blended to form a fuel that is 15 percent ethanol, called E15, is growing in popularity, Becker said.
“We think there will be hundreds more stations offering it next year,” Becker said. “We are seeing big initiatives from very large retail chains to get this product in the pipeline.”
Omaha-based Green Plains operates 12 plants around the country, producing about 1 billion gallons of ethanol a year. The company Tuesday reported a third-quarter profit that jumped more than fourfold, to $41.7 million.
Additional gallons of E15, now available at only about 90 stations in 14 states, will boost volumes going forward, Becker said. He told analysts and investors on the conference call that the ethanol industry is working hard to persuade retailers. Consumers, he said, are already sold.
“The stations that offer E15 are the cheapest on the street and they are draining their tanks all the time,” Becker said. “The product gets sold when offered to consumers.”
Blending ethanol into gasoline can create a motor fuel that is cheaper than clear gas because ethanol, produced mainly from corn, is less expensive. Iowa and Nebraska are the top ethanol-producing states, and rank first and third in corn production.
Ethanol has its opponents, who say per-gallon savings are offset by lower mileage from ethanol’s lower energy content.
On the rail transport front, Becker said it was better than the previous quarter but has hit recent snags. All of the nation’s major freight railroads are now required to file weekly reports with the federal Surface Transportation Board. The reports were ordered after grain shippers complained that crude oil gets priority over other cargoes, a scenario denied by the railroads.
“We are still able to move product pretty well, but have seen some slowdowns of late,” Becker said.
The nation’s two largest railroads acknowledge problems. Omaha-based Union Pacific and Berkshire Hathaway-owned BNSF Railway say they are working to speed service by hiring crews, adding equipment and improving track.
“BNSF is working with our ethanol customers, including Green Plains, to make sure their products get to their ultimate destination,” spokeswoman Amy Casas said. “Our ethanol customers are experiencing gradual improvements on our railroad and have our continued commitment that we will add the resources necessary to handle all of our customers’ business.”
Union Pacific spokeswoman Calli Hite said Chief Executive Jack Koraleski discussed rail network problems during a conference call with investors and analysts last week, and pledged to remedy them.
“Union Pacific has increased its locomotive fleet by around 900 units since September of last year and will hire 5,500 new employees this year,” Hite said. “The company also has stepped up its overall resource plan to provide the level of service our customers have come to expect.”
Read the original story here : Ethanol Maker Green Plains Says Rail Transport Not Keeping Up As More Embrace E15
Oct 27, 2014
By ICM Inc
ICM Inc. is pleased to announce that Patriot Renewable Fuels LLC of Annawan, Illinois, has entered into a professional services agreement for ICM’s patent-pending Fiber Separation Technology and ICM’s patent-pending Generation 1.5 Grain Fiber to Cellulosic Ethanol Technology (Gen 1.5) for its ethanol plant.
FST is a value-added platform technology that increases ethanol yield and throughput, as well as increases oil recovery for its customers. The FST process separates the fiber that will be used as the feedstock for the Gen 1.5 process to produce cellulosic ethanol. Removing the fiber from the standard ethanol stream with the FST process allows the plant to produce each gallon more efficiently as well as creates the option for diversified co-products with high protein feeds and fiber to be produced.
Chris Mitchell, president of ICM, said, “ICM is pleased to see Patriot take another step forward toward cellulosic ethanol by agreeing to complete the specific engineering and design of our technologies for their Annawan site. This step will enable their board to evaluate a construction start in 2015. We appreciate Patriot’s continuing business as it continues to build on ICM’s base ethanol plant and our Selective Milling Technology. Patriot will be positioning itself to lead our industry into cellulosic ethanol, which not only diversifies its plant, but improves ethanol yield to over 3.08 gallons per bushel. Our team is excited to continue working with Patriot as it grows its business.”
“ICM’s ethanol technology is a logical platform on which to build our business as a biorefinery,” said Rick Vondra, vice president and general manager of Patriot Renewable Fuels. “There are many new products and growth possibilities using corn as our feedstock, and we have identified these as two high-potential processes that we can adopt now.”
Read the original story here : ICM Announces Agreement With Patriot Renewable Fuels
Oct 27, 2014
By Isabel Lane
In the US, Fuels America has launched a six-figure TV and radio campaign in Minnesota, Michigan, and Nebraska thanking American renewable fuels champions Sen. Al Franken, Rep. Collin Peterson, Rep. Lee Terry and Rep. Gary Peters for supporting the Renewable Fuel Standard and “fighting for local jobs and working to end America’s reliance on foreign oil. Each are facing competitive elections come November 4th.
The ads are detailed below:
- Michigan Statewide: Radio ad titled “Our Pockets” about Gary Peters’ support of the RFS and fight to break America’s addiction to foreign oil, and how the Koch Brothers and Big Oil have spent millions against Peters. The ad can be heard here.
- Minnesota Statewide: Radio ad titled “Next Caller” highlighting Senator Franken’s support of the RFS and his work pushing the Obama Administration to increase production of renewable fuels. The ad can be heard here.
- Minnesota’s 7th District: Radio ad titled “Change Course” highlighting Collin Peterson’s support for a strong RFS, reduced reliance on foreign oil, and a stronger rural economy. The ad can be heard here.
- Nebraska’s 2nd District: TV ad titled “Solution” highlighting Lee Terry’s support of the RFS. The ad can be viewed here and a screenshot is below.
Earlier this election season, Fuels America ran a full-page USA ad warning that the EPA’s proposal to fundamentally alter the Renewable Fuel Standard would seriously undermine his Administration’s efforts to combat climate change, promote energy independence, and support the emerging cellulosic ethanol industry.
Read the original story here : Fuels America Debuts Campaign For RFS Supports Facing Reelection
Oct 24, 2014
By Erin Voegele
The U.S. EPA has published renewable identification number (RIN) data for September, reporting that both D3 cellulosic biofuel and D7 cellulosic diesel RINs were generated during the month.
Nearly 7.56 million D3 cellulosic biofuel RINs were generated in September, bringing the total for the first nine months of the year to more than 11.12 million. According to the EPA, 35,473 of those RINs have been generated for cellulosic ethanol so far this year, along with 44,168 for cellulosic renewable gasoline, 5.12 million for renewable compressed natural gas and 5.93 million for renewable liquefied natural gas. All 11.12 million D3 RINs have been generated by domestic producers.
EPA data indicates 17,073 D7 cellulosic diesel RINs were generated in September, bringing the total for the first nine months of the year to 32,680. About 8,859 of those RINs have been generated for cellulosic diesel, with 26,416 generated for cellulosic heating oil. According to the EPA, 8,859 D7 RINS were generated by domestic producers and 26,416 by importers.
More than 4.2 million D5 advanced biofuel RINs were generated in September, bringing the year-to-date total to 119.47 million. Most, 77.09 million, have been generated for ethanol, with 20.35 million generated for biogas, 11.15 million generated for naptha, and 10.97 million generated for non-ester renewable diesel. To date, 61.83 million D5 RINs have been generated by domestic producers this year, with 57.72 million generated by importers.
More than 1.16 billion D6 renewable fuel RINs were generated in September, bringing the total for the first nine months of the year to 10.68 billion. The vast majority, 10.44 billion, have been generated for ethanol. Approximately 48.06 million D5 RINs were generated for biodiesel, along with 197.07 million for non-ester renewable diesel. So far this year, 10.44 billion D5 RINs have been generated by domestic producers, with 46.14 million generated by importers and 197.07 million generated by foreign entities.
Approximately 211.49 million D4 biomass-based diesel RINS were generated in September, bringing the year-to-date total to nearly 1.92 billion. Most, 1.49 billion, were generated for biodiesel, with 432.29 million generated for renewable diesel. Nearly 1.55 billion D5 RINs have been generated domestically, with 115.34 million generated by importers and 255.76 generated by foreign entities.
As of the close of September, the EPA estimates nearly 12.74 billion RINs have been generated this year. More than 324.94 million of those RINs have been retired, with 378.33 million locked and available and 12.03 billion unlocked and available.
Read the original story here : EPA : Cellulosic Fuel Production Continues In September
Oct 22, 2014
By Tom Bryan
Two weeks from Election Day, Bob Dinneen told a crowd of international grain and animal feed buyers gathered in Seattle that whichever party controls Congress next year will “have the gavel” on energy and agriculture but lack the power to advance or upset biofuels policy.
“Elections matter,” Dinneen said, citing President George W. Bush’s unlikely ascendance into ethanol industry favor when he signed both Renewable Fuels Standards into law in 2005 and 2007. “If Gore would have won [in 2000], his vision for renewables would have been more reaching but it would have had a climate change component and probably not taken up by Congress,” Dinneen said. “If McCain would have won [in 2008], he would have tried to dismantle the RFS.”
Dinneen said Obama’s current 41 percent approval rating isn’t terrible as public support for second-term presidents goes, but it is a signal of the trouble awaiting Democrats on Nov. 2. “The Democrats have more seats to defend, which means they’re on the defensive,” Dinneen told attendees of the 2014 Export Exchange in Seattle. “Republicans only need to pick up six seats to take the Senate, and where those seats are makes it more likely to happen.”
Most Senate races are still tough to predict, Dinneen said, but several national news outlets have already called the victor. The Washington Post recently predicted that it is a 94 percent certainty that Republicans will take the Senate, while the New York Times estimated the same outcome with 68 percent certainty. Dinneen reminded the audience, which included delegations from 34 different nations, that either party needs “51 percent to get the gavel, but 60 percent to get anything done.” Nevertheless, he said, a Republican controlled Senate could have implications for the ethanol industry, depending on the inclinations of the reigning party’s committee chairs. Notably, the Washington Times recently reported that seven in ten likely voters believe Republicans will retain control of the House.
One of the few things that is expected to be accomplished between the elections and the start of the next Congressional session is the passage of a continuing resolution, or “CR,” that would extend certain renewable energy provisions including tax credits for biodiesel and renewable diesel, cellulosic biofuel and biofuels pump installation. Meanwhile, there is still no word on when the U.S. EPA will release its 2014 renewable volume obligation numbers, or RVOs. Dinneen said the EPA’s RVO suggestions “make no sense,” showing no sign of letting up on the agency in light of unsubstantiated reports that its forthcoming RVO numbers will be higher than initially thought. Holding the line, Dinneen said the EPA can only reduce the RFS schedule if there is inadequate supply of biofuels. The lack of infrastructure, on the other hand, is not a valid reason for deferment, he said. “Everyone knew we were going to put 36 billion gallons of renewable fuel into a 140-billion-gallon market,” Dinneen said. “Congress knew we were going to move past 10 percent. So the EPA’s suggestion that we need to roll back the RFS because ExxonMobil can’t use E85 is ridiculous.”
Dinneen said whatever the outcome of the 2014 RVO, one or more industries will be disgruntled over it. “This rule will be litigated,” he said, adding that he expects the oil industry’s campaign against the RFS to continue for years.
Dinneen touted the industry’s progress in the cellulosic ethanol arena, pointing to the start of commercial production at Poet-DSM and Abengoa Bioenergy. “It’s happening now,” he said, explaining that cellulosic ethanol producers view policy uncertainty as their largest risk. “It’s no time to be pulling back the program.”
Addressing industry growth, Dinneen said getting E15 into the marketplace has been slow but steady, and he said ethanol exports may reach 800 million gallons in 2014, and perhaps trend toward the 1 billion mark in 2015. Showing a chart of the world’s top U.S. ethanol importers, Dinneen said, “If this country doesn’t take it, others will.”
Circling back to politics, Dinneen said today’s $3 corn could “drive painful decisions” for American agriculture. “If the ethanol industry is not allowed to grow, and corn exports don’t grow, and the carry out is big, deficiency payments [to U.S. corn farmers] are likely,” he said, calling for a return of bipartisanship amongst farm-state policy makers. “Ag needs to get back together and fight these fights together,” he said. “Or we’re going to lose.”
Read the original story here : Dinneen : 'Elections Matter'