The recently released Climate-Smart Agriculture Progress Report from the USDA is a good first step in compiling initial conversations and recommendations for a unified strategy to build climate resilience and cut greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. 

The report explores various “themes” that emerged from comments and stakeholder process, including the role of voluntary environmental markets and concerns about at-the-farm level policies or programs. 

Moreover, it is an excellent first step in a very complex process of building on the strengths of the agricultural sector and its role in fighting climate change. That role, through voluntary incentives, could involve direct on the farm actions to increase energy efficiency as well as to green the biomass supply used to produce biofuels. Many herculean and creative efforts will indeed be needed to timely and effectively tackle climate change.

E15 and higher ethanol blends are tools which are already reducing GHG emissions in the Minnesota transportation sector. Even more can be done with those tools to further reduce GHG emissions. One action, for instance, is to give biofuels greater access to the marketplace via additional storage and dispensing infrastructure. The result will be reduced carbon intensity of liquid transportation fuel.  

While ethanol producers strive to use the latest technology and processes to reduce the carbon intensity of their renewable fuel, even more can be done to reduce the carbon intensity of the biomass supply chain. 

While the report covers many issues, as part of the ongoing dialogue with stakeholders, we welcome the opportunity to explore how voluntary incentives could be used to more rapidly “green” the biomass supply chain. For biofuel producers in particular, the foundational issues are whether the biomass supply chain is actually made “greener” (lower carbon intensity) and the carbon accounting method is robust and accurate.

The report and what it reflects is certainly a step in the right direction but it is missing clear goals and timelines for action and results. Now is the time to build upon the strengths in the agriculture sector so as to foster the rapid adoption of GHG reduction practices and buy-in to voluntary environmental markets. The data, information, science and evidence is crystal clear on climate change: time is of the essence when it comes to drastically cutting GHG emissions.  

By Brian Werner, Executive Director.

Besides perhaps for Prince, if there’s one thing for which our state is known, it is our reputation of being “Minnesota Nice.” You’ve heard this a million times, right? When I introduce myself at out-of-town receptions as a Minnesotan, it’s always one of the first questions I’m asked (often in the Fargo accent). What is MinnesOOOta Nice? 

While there are many ways to define this cultural stereotype, most people would say it is a proclivity toward being passive-aggressive, possessing mild-mannerisms, or having the urge to not stand out from the crowd.

All that being true, when I first started working on biofuel and agriculture policy for Minnesota public servants like U.S. Senator Amy Klobuchar and former U.S. Representative and House Agriculture Committee Chairman Collin Peterson, I was surprised to learn the prominent role that our state played in establishing the ethanol industry. Often referred to as the “Minnesota Model,” the ethanol industry’s foundations began here in the Upper Midwest with the dedicated, grassroots efforts of our farmers, and the partnerships they formed with one another and private and public entities. 

If kick-starting the homegrown energy renaissance wasn’t enough, Minnesota doubled down on ethanol policy in the subsequent years. To start, we became the first state in the nation to mandate the use of ethanol in our fuel supply. Second, we started selling E15 or Unleaded 88 at Penn Minnoco in south Minneapolis in October 2013 and today, in just under ten years, you can find E15/U88 at 422 Minnesota retail locations. Lastly, if you take a flex-fuel vehicle out for a drive around Minnesota this fall, you’ll have access to more E85 fueling locations than anywhere else in the nation.

When it comes to ethanol, Minnesota stands out. 

That is why I am honored and excited to assume the role of Executive Director of the Minnesota Biofuels Association. Minnesota has a wonderful story to tell about developing and fostering a homegrown source of transportation fuel that is better for consumers, better for the environment, and better for rural economies. We shouldn’t be shy about telling that story. 

But while we should absolutely tout our successes more often, we can’t afford to rest on our laurels. As the critical need to decarbonize transportation, reduce dependence on imported oil, and save consumers money at the pump grows, the leadership opportunities for ethanol grow, too. 

Minnesota’s leadership on biofuel policy is needed now more than ever. I look forward to working with all of you to strengthen the voice of the Minnesota Biofuels Association and the biofuels industry as a whole to ensure that ethanol’s best days have only just begun. 

Much like a successful “March Madness” basketball team, a successful legislative strategy needs to combine an efficient offense with a lock-down defense. 

Offense

Legislative Committees in Minnesota must act favorably on major appropriation and finance bills covering the next biennium (fiscal years 2024 and 2025) by next Tuesday, April 4. Ahead of this deadline, we have been actively working to advance key funding priorities to assist ethanol producers in Minnesota. 

• Biofuel Infrastructure. Legislation has been introduced in both chambers (SF 1246 – Kupec; HF 1474 – Frederick) to provide grant funding for upgrading or replacing infrastructure at fuel retail locations to offer higher biofuel blends. We testified in support of both bills and, this week, both committees included biofuel infrastructure funding in their respective omnibus finance bills. The Senate bill matches Governor Walz’s budget proposal at $9 million ($4.5 million per year), while the House proposes $6 million ($3 million per year). 

• Bioincentive payments. Legislation to provide funding to reimburse biofuel producers for the commercial-scale production of advanced biofuels has been introduced in both chambers (SF 1178 – Hauschild; HF 1477 – Tabke). We provided supportive testimony and when the House and Senate Agriculture committees released their omnibus bills this week they included strong Bioincentive funding. The Senate bill provides $12 million ($6 million per year), while the House provides $13.5 million ($6.75 million per year), of which $1 million per year is set-aside to backfill claims from previous fiscal years.

Defense

Many bills have been introduced this session that would subject ethanol production plants to duplicative or unnecessary administrative and environmental reporting, monitoring, and testing requirements. 

• Biofuel Monitoring & Testing for PFAS and Treated Seeds. Legislation has been introduced (HF 2761 – Hansen) and included in the House Environment committee’s omnibus bill to require biofuel facilities to monitor and test for neonicotinoids and PFAS. We testified against the bill because no ethanol plant in the state of Minnesota uses treated seed as a feedstock. If they proposed to do so, they would need a new permit from MPCA. 

• Disclosure of Sensitive Business Information. Legislation has been introduced (HF 475 – Hansen) and included in the House Agriculture committee’s omnibus bill to require Bioincentive program participants to disclose sensitive business information in order to qualify. No other program administered by the Minnesota Department of Agriculture requires such disclosure, and changing program requirements midstream would undermine the goal of attracting investment in advanced biofuels with carbon reductions 70 percent lower than petroleum.

Neither of the above bills have been included in Senate omnibus bills and MN Bio-Fuels will be working to keep them out of any final conference committee agreement while working in the long-term to educate members of the DFL majority about the ethanol production and permitting process. 

MN Bio-Fuels will continue to advocate on behalf of Minnesota’s ethanol industry and ensure that a balanced offensive and defensive strategy leads to legislative success.  

One of the most overwrought narratives in energy and transportation policy today is the idea that liquid biofuels and Electric Vehicles (EVs) are battling “American Gladiator-style” in a zero-sum game over the future of the domestic automobile market.

Predictably, this narrative is fueled - energy pun intended - in large part by partisan politics and special interest groups that either have a personal stake in securing total victory for their preferred transportation option or want to use the issue as a wedge in the next campaign. 

As with most public policy problems, the solution to decarbonizing our transportation sector isn’t quite as black-and-white as this worn-out narrative suggests. The reality is we need a strategy that utilizes an all-of-the-above approach to level the playing field for proven technologies and fuels that have a track record of quickly lowering emissions. To successfully reach our carbon reduction goals, this strategy must also carefully consider current market and supply chain trends. 

False Narrative #1: An All-Electric Future

Shortly after his election, President Biden issued an executive order outlining a goal that by 2030 50 percent of all light-duty vehicle sales would be zero-tailpipe emissions vehicles (ZEVs). The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) recently doubled down on this goal by releasing a proposed regulation for tailpipe emissions that would guarantee that 67 percent of new light-duty vehicle sales are EVs by 2032. 

As I wrote in our comments to the EPA on the proposed rule earlier this month, the rule effectively compels automakers to produce battery electric vehicles to the detriment of similar technologies that can achieve the same or better environmental performance. Utilizing low-carbon liquid fuels in existing vehicles can achieve greenhouse gas reductions faster than new EVs can displace the existing fleet.

There are currently 278 million registered cars, vans, SUVs, pickups, and motorcycles in the U.S., of which about 1.2 percent are battery or plug-in hybrid EVs. EVs accounted for 5.8 percent of new light-duty vehicle sales in 2022. That means, under the proposed rule, a gap of 61.2 percent in EV sales needs to be filled in less than 10 years. 

Such a rapid build-out of EV sales ignores the challenges associated with charging infrastructure availability, tax credit eligibility, consumer preference, critical mineral supply and demand, and battery range and performance. 

False Narrative #2: War on Electric Vehicles

A recent campaign video from former President Trump referred to EV mandates as “a ridiculous Green New Deal crusade [that] is causing car prices to skyrocket while setting the stage for the destruction of American auto production.” 

While we may agree that a top-down approach that picks winners and losers among zero-emissions technologies is the wrong approach, over-the-top political rhetoric like this feeds the narrative that the existence of EVs in the marketplace means that liquid biofuels will somehow become obsolete. 

According to data from Oak Ridge National Laboratory, the average age of vehicles on the road is approximately 15 years, and 16 percent of passenger cars and 32 percent of light-duty trucks remain on the road for more than 20 years. We need to seek carbon reduction solutions for the hundreds of millions of cars operating on liquid fuels today. 

For some consumers, that may mean trading in their internal-combustion engine vehicles in favor of an EV for short-range and urban-only travel. For many others, that may mean utilizing higher blends of ethanol, which reduce GHG emissions by 47 percent as compared to gasoline. 

We cannot ignore that there has been significant government investment in the manufacture of EVs, batteries, and EV chargers, and many auto companies have announced similar investment in domestic EV manufacturing.

Instead of fighting to roll back or disincentivize these public and private investments, we should be pushing for a level playing field for all technologies and fuels moving forward, which will be the key to reaching net-zero greenhouse gas emissions by mid-century. EVs and liquid biofuels can and should be working in tandem to provide consumers with low-carbon transportation options. 

Solution: Teaming Up on Clean Vehicles

The ethanol industry is working to break down these false narratives. 

Our partners at the Renewable Fuels Association (RFA) recently debuted the first-ever Plug-in Hybrid Electric Flex Fuel Vehicle, which offers the best of both worlds. The vehicle has a range of 430 miles given a full tank of E85 and a full battery charge. Additionally, it has been shown to reduce emissions by about 80 percent compared to a vehicle running on gasoline. 

This doesn’t need to be a zero-sum game whereby EVs win only if ethanol loses, and vice-versa. This innovative technological solution that marries ethanol and electricity shows that the two can work together to offer consumers an environmentally friendly option that maintains flexibility and reliability. 

The Minnesota Bio-Fuels Association will continue working to ensure that Minnesota-grown, Minnesota-made biofuels are in a position to bring about meaningful and achievable reductions in greenhouse gas emissions from transportation.