In the News

Energy and Environment News - ClimateWire

May 5, 2020

An oil bailout remains unpopular with U.S. voters despite weeks of nonstop pain for the industry, according to a new poll.

Morning Consult's latest tracking poll found that 38% of the roughly 2,000 voters it contacted were in support of an oil and gas bailout.

Those results, collected in surveys last week, showed that public sentiment hadn't budged from late March and early April, when the same pollster also found 38% support for a bailout.

Opposition to an oil bailout also remained static at 43% of registered voters, and 19% had no opinion, according to the nationwide tracking polls. The polls had a margin of error of 2 percentage points.

Clean energy fared better. A majority of voters backed bailouts for renewable energy, with 56% of voters in support and 24% opposed.

Trump voters were more likely to support an oil bailout (50%), though a plurality also supported a renewable bailout (45%).

Oil allies responded to the poll by urging flexibility. Industry aid doesn't have to look like a bailout, they said.

"This is further evidence that tax cuts for energy extracted on federal lands might be more favorably viewed than direct spending/bailouts," Paul Blair, director of strategic initiatives at Americans for Tax Reform, wrote on Twitter.

"Cut the royalty rate!" he said.

The oil industry suffered historic blows in the time between the two polls. Amid a price war between Russia and Saudi Arabia, President Trump helped negotiate an agreement for oil-producing nations to cut output. But it wasn't enough to counteract a sharp decline made worse by the coronavirus pandemic.

Storage tanks are filled near capacity, and one benchmark showed negative prices for the first time ever.

The Federal Reserve last week expanded a loan program to include struggling oil and gas firms. Environmentalists blasted that move as a quiet bailout, but industry officials said it wasn't that simple.

Steve Everley, a managing director at FTI Consulting who works with the oil and gas sector, responded to the Morning Consult poll by pointing to one of its other findings: More Americans say low oil prices hurt the economy (52%) than say it's helped their personal finances (42%).

Everley added that he would be curious what voters consider to be a bailout.

Extending tax credits and offering Treasury loans with interest aren't the same as direct cash payments, he said.

"Many of these are not bailouts, or at least should not be considered bailouts. But do voters see the nuance?" he wrote on Twitter.

Read the original story here

US Department of Agriculture

May 4, 2020

(Washington, D.C.) - U.S. Secretary of Agriculture Sonny Perdue announced the U.S. Department of Agriculture intends to make available up to $100 million in competitive grants for activities designed to expand the availability and sale of renewable fuels.

“America’s energy independence is critical to our economic security, and President Trump fully recognizes the importance of our ethanol and biofuels industries and the positive impacts they deliver to consumers and farmers with an affordable, abundant, and clean burning fuel,” Secretary Perdue said. “American ethanol and biofuel producers have been affected by decreased energy demands due to the coronavirus, and these grants to expand their availability will help increase their use during our economic resurgence.”

The Higher Blends Infrastructure Incentive Program (HBIIP) consist of up to $100 million in funding for competitive grants or sales incentives to eligible entities for activities designed to expand the sales and use of ethanol and biodiesel fuels. Funds will be made directly available to assist transportation fueling and biodiesel distribution facilities with converting to higher ethanol and biodiesel blends by sharing the costs related to and/or offering sales incentives for the installation of fuel pumps, related equipment, and infrastructure.

Additional Information:

USDA is making the grants available under the Higher Blends Infrastructure Incentive Program (HBIIP). The program is intended to increase significantly the sale and use of higher blends of ethanol and biodiesel by expanding the infrastructure for renewable fuels derived from U.S. agricultural products.

Grants for up to 50 percent of total eligible project costs, but not more than $5 million, are available to vehicle fueling facilities, including, but not limited to, local fueling stations/locations, convenience stores, hypermarket fueling stations, fleet facilities, fuel terminal operations, midstream partners and/or distribution facilities.

USDA plans to make available approximately $86 million for implementation activities related to higher blends of fuel ethanol, and approximately $14 million for implementation activities related to higher blends of biodiesel. Higher biofuel blends are fuels containing ethanol greater than 10 percent by volume and/or fuels containing biodiesel blends greater than five percent by volume.

For application information and other program details, see the public inspection notice in the Federal Register (PDF, 369 KB), or visit the Higher Blends Infrastructure Incentive Program web page.

Read the original press release here.

Renewable Fuels Association

May 1, 2020

A coalition of ethanol and farm groups today sent a letter to the Environmental Protection Agency opposing the American Petroleum Institute’s recent petition requesting reconsideration of the 2020 Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) final rule.

API claims reconsideration of the 2020 RFS rule is necessary in light of the coalition’s recent Tenth Circuit court victory that overturned small refinery exemptions illegally granted by EPA. The successful Tenth Circuit court challenge was brought against EPA by the Renewable Fuels Association, National Corn Growers Association, National Farmers Union, and American Coalition for Ethanol.

Specifically, API argues that the 2020 RFS rule should be revised to eliminate measures that prospectively “reallocate” RFS blending obligations expected to be lost to refinery waivers. API claims reallocation of expected waivers is no longer needed because the Tenth Circuit decision should significantly curtail the number of waivers granted. However, EPA has not yet confirmed that it will implement the tenets of the Tenth Circuit court decision nationwide, meaning reconsideration of the 2020 RFS rule would be woefully premature.

“There is no basis for revisiting or modifying EPA’s current approach until EPA acknowledges that the central tenets of the Tenth Circuit’s decision are appropriately applied throughout the country,” the groups wrote.

In fact, the 2020 RFS volumes should not be adjusted downward to remove reallocated volumes even after EPA applies the Tenth Circuit court decision nationally, according to the coalition’s letter.

“As noted by the Court, EPA’s recent abuse of its small refinery exemption authority has significantly harmed the U.S. ethanol industry.  Indeed, nationally, more than four billion gallons of 2016-2018 renewable fuel volume requirements were lost due to EPA’s illegally issued small refinery waivers.  Applying the Tenth Circuit decision nationally while leaving the 2020 RFS rule intact would begin to restore a small amount of the renewable fuel volume requirements lost to past small refinery exemptions; still, doing so would come nowhere near fully redressing the demand destruction wrought by the exemptions.”

The letter is available here

Read the original story here

Congresswoman Angie Craig

Apr 28, 2020

Today, Congresswoman Angie Craig (MN-02) announced the introduction of the Clean Fuels Deployment Act of 2020. The bipartisan legislation she introduced with U.S. Reps. Abby Finkenauer (D-IA), Don Bacon (R-NE), and Roger Marshall (R-KS), would provide funding for installing and converting fuel pump infrastructure to deliver higher blends of ethanol and biodiesel.

The bill authorizes $500 million over five years to help retailers offer higher ethanol blends, expand the geographic area selling ethanol blends, support biodiesel, bioheat, and sustainable aviation fuel markets, and accelerate the deployment of fueling infrastructure. Given recent uncertainties in the renewable fuels industry, it is more important than ever to fund infrastructure improvements and remove market barriers to accessing clean and renewable fuels.

“The Clean Fuels Deployment Act is a critical step toward supporting biofuels at a particularly difficult time. As a member of the Congressional Biofuels Caucus, I’ve long supported the year-round sale of E15 and increasing options for consumers at the pump,” said Rep. Angie Craig. “This commonsense solution would provide additional certainty to Minnesota family farmers. I look forward to following through on much needed relief to our producers across the country.”

"The time is now to further diversify our fuel supply and move more biofuels into the market,"Finkenauer said. "Biofuels offer a proven path to reducing greenhouse gas emissions, decarbonizing the transportation sector, driving economic growth and creating jobs. I'm grateful to have bipartisan support from Representatives Bacon, Craig and Marshall. Cleaner fuels are good for our economy and our environment, and we’re going to keep fighting for them.”

In addition to supporting the distribution of higher ethanol and biodiesel blends at fueling stations, the program could also be used to enhance pipelines and terminals to blend and carry ethanol and biodiesel. Funding from the clean fuels grant program could be used to incentivize the deployment of ethanol and biodiesel fueling infrastructure and convert existing infrastructure to deliver ethanol blends greater than 10 percent and biodiesel blends greater than 20 percent.

Read the original story here

Ethanol Producer Magazine

Apr 27, 2020

Ethanol blends save lives through reduced vehicle emissions. That is the conclusion of a new peer reviewed technical paper published in the  Journal of Air & Waste Management, validating previous research efforts by the Urban Air Initiative that find when ethanol is added to gasoline, it significantly reduces toxic emissions tied to air pollution.

The research team leading this effort included notable refinery and fuel emission experts who looked at hundreds of earlier studies on emissions and ethanol.  A glaring error, according to the authors, is that these studies assume a standard fuel is created for testing emissions. However, the research found that test fuels rarely resemble real-world fuels, similar to what consumers purchase.

The paper found that when simply adding ethanol to fuel, it reduces the most carbon intensive and carcinogenic fuel additives called aromatics. Replacing these benzene-based additives with ethanol directly reduces particulate matter (PM) and NOx emissions, both of which are ozone precursors and represent significant health risks to the public. The discrepancy the authors found in the previous studies centered on the fact that test fuels add ethanol and aromatics together to raise octane, while oil refiners actually reduce aromatics to utilize ethanol as an octane enhancer. Comparing a baseline E0 fuel to E10 and E15 shows the ethanol blends are significantly better when real world fuel blending conditions are used.

“What this new paper makes clear is the aromatic reduction resulting from increased ethanol volumes provides significant health benefits from lower particulate emissions,” said Urban Air President Dave VanderGriend. “The Urban Air Initiative and its supporters in the ethanol industry call on the EPA to look at this research and consider the facts uncovered in this paper as it prepares to make regulatory decisions about ethanol blended fuels.”

And, in light of the current health crisis, the fact that regions suffering from air pollution are experiencing higher cases of the COVID-19 virus suggests reducing emissions needs to be a national priority for the EPA, according to VanderGriend.

Read the original story here.

Granite Falls News

Apr 26, 2020

The leadership at Highwater Ethanol, which is located near Lamberton in Redwood County, is always looking for new ways to add value to its product.

In a time when fuel consumption is down due to the reduction in travel, the demand for ethanol has also decreased.

For many of the facilities producing ethanol in the region that could mean, and has meant, reducing hours and even some temporary shutdowns.

“People are driving less and that is having an impact on the industry,” said Brian Kletscher, Highwater Ethanol general manager and CEO.

A new venture is helping Highwater Ethanol keep the doors open.

According to Kletscher a couple of the ethanol facility’s vendors began talking with Highwater’s leadership about an idea.

Would it be interested in providing denatured 190 proof that would be used in hand sanitizer?

The Highwater leadership did the research and determined that moving forward with this plan was in the best interest of the facility and the people it employs.

So, as of the end of March the company began the process of supplying the product to the industry.

Kletscher said development of the denatured 190 proof at the plant did not mean making any changes to the operation.

“The plant was already producing it,” explained Kletscher, adding it just meant taking it off of the production line before the ethanol process is complete.

The facility had to work through some FDA requirements in order to move ahead with the new product.

Highwater recognized the Renewable Fuels Association for bringing clarity with the FDA, adding those efforts have been appreciated.

A guidance document from the FDA has allowed the ethanol industry and plants like the one in Lamberton to help slow the spread of COVID-19. Now it is shipping that denatured 190 proof to its vendors that are then able to ship that product as hand sanitizer across the United States.

Kletscher said as of the beginning of April, the product coming from the Highwater Ethanol plant has been shipped by those vendors to eight different states.

In this way, Highwater Ethanol has been able to help in the global battle against COVID-19.

Is this part of the long-term future at Highwater?

Kletscher said that is an answer that continues to be up in the air, adding that will all depend on demand.

Kletscher said the Highwater facility was set up in a way that it could easily make the move, adding not all of the ethanol plants have been able to do that.

“We are fortunate to have great vendors who do a good job using our products,” Kletscher said. “The board is excited, the employees are excited and I am excited about this opportunity.”

Highwater continues to purchase corn, sell dried distillers grains, modified distillers grain, corn oil and denatured ethanol for the transportation fuel market.

Highwater encourages everyone to be safe during these unprecedented times.

Learn more at highwaterethanol.com.

Read the original story here.

Biofuels Digest

Apr 22, 2020

By Doug Durante, Executive Director, Clean Fuels Development Coalition

A recent article by Growth Energy CEO Emily Skor caught my eye due to a simple but important headline, which was Ethanol Industry Needs Support Now More than Ever.

The economic importance of the ethanol industry to agriculture and rural America cannot be overstated, and the article did a good job making that point. But I want build on the theme that now, when we’ve been knocked down and are on the mat is when we  need support, but from an additional angle—to preserve some sense of energy security and to be ready to continue to reduce aromatics in gasoline once we rebound from our current shut down.

At CFDC, and with our industry partners, we have made no secret that we are going to stay on EPA to reduce toxics in gasoline. The family of benzene octane additives producing carcinogens in the air we breathe do not get a pass, no matter how much gasoline we have or how cheap it is. The clean octane alternative of ethanol can only deliver its highest value if it is positioned and ready to go.  As assistance packages are crafted for essential industries, ethanol is as legitimate a candidate for assistance as any U.S. industry, for the reasons Ms. Skor notes in her article.

And when I say assistance, I do not mean bailout.  Just as the oil industry is calling for the federal government to purchase oil for the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, the Clean Fuels Development Coalition, the National Farmers Union, and others have called for the establishment of a biofuel reserve, with ethanol being purchased but then sold into the fuel market at some future date, with the government getting back the money it bought the ethanol with.

While the emphasis on jobs is of course key, there is an equally important consideration, and that is Energy Security, which has often been a term without definition or true understanding.  The double hit the domestic oil and gas sector is experiencing with the COVID-19 virus and the price war between the Saudis and the Russians threatens to return the US to the 1970’s, when we were paralyzed by supply disruptions and global events.  And make no mistake, ethanol is a gasoline additive, so like it or not, the two are inextricably linked.

The obvious intent of this price war—coming at a time when demand has been reduced by half—is to put U.S. oil companies out of business, or at least as many as they can.  Under that scenario, when the economy rebounds and our hefty appetite for oil resumes, we will once again need to depend on other countries, who can set the price and control supply, putting the U.S. in a position we fought so hard to avoid.

“Having a lot of domestic oil doesn’t seem like energy security to me when a couple of countries can get together and drive our guys out of business.”

This has serious implications for our national security, economy, and well-being — if we fail to defend ourselves. Part of that defense is making sure we have alternatives.  We fought energy security battles via legislation in 1980, again with an Energy Security Act in 1992, and again with the EISA legislation in 2007 but would still be hit hard by world oil prices if they returned to $100 per barrel or more.  That doesn’t strike me as much in the way of security. 

Many in the petroleum industry gloat that we are net exporters of oil now and completely independent.  Well, just how energy independent and secure are we if two countries can put our guys out of business simply by lowering the price?  I have articles in my files from decades ago when we began to fight back against our oil dependence and OPEC officials were quoted as saying they should keep prices low to discourage the development of alternatives.  Then, as we regularly failed to develop such alternatives, they would periodically raise the price to find the point where we would squeal, and then lower it again. Crippling gasoline and home heating oil prices just a decade ago should serve as a reminder.

Anyone in the energy business, be it stationary source power or transportation fuels, has lived through these cycles of both high and low prices. Before our last oil boom, the U.S. depended on more than 60% of its oil from OPEC and other foreign sources. Sure, the domestic oil boom has turned things around but not all of our domestic production is going to make it back from where we are now.  The 10% of the fuel pool ethanol represents is going to be more important than ever, and we can do so much more with higher blends.  And when we reduce gasoline demand we reduce oil demand, and that reduction is reflected in lower oil prices around the globe.

Putting our guard down now with respect to protecting our alternatives like ethanol while continuing to develop new bio technologies could put us right back to the dark ages of oil dependence.  No one ever wants to see the gas lines we saw from the Iranian oil embargos of the 1970s when gas was rationed through odd and even days. And that is not that farfetched—just as foreign suppliers can flood the market with oil, they can turn the spigot the other way.  These oil countries remain among the most unstable regions on the planet; disruptions in the oil business 5,000 miles away affects price everywhere.

Imagine the struggles our economy is facing as we get back on our feet over the next two years.  Now imagine $4.00 or higher gasoline and the burden that puts on our citizens. And if measures are not taken to protect the hedge we have with domestic ethanol, that gasoline will be loaded with toxic aromatics, possibly making us even more susceptible to COVID 19 and other new viruses.  We must keep corn ethanol and all biofuels afloat.  It is the only true success story in terms of liquid fuels of all the failed energy security efforts of the past 40 years.

Read the original story here

Reuters

Apr 18, 2020

Dwindling supplies of carbon dioxide from ethanol plants are sparking concern about shortages of beer, soda and seltzer water - essentials for many quarantined Americans. 

Brewers and soft-drink makers use carbon dioxide, or CO2, for carbonation, which gives beer and soda fizz. Ethanol producers are a key provider of CO2 to the food industry, as they capture that gas as a byproduct of ethanol production and sell it in large quantities. 

But ethanol, which is blended into the nation’s gasoline supply, has seen production fall sharply due to the drop in gasoline demand as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic. Gasoline demand is down by more than 30% in the United States. 

The lack of ethanol output is disrupting this highly specialized corner of the food industry, as 34 of the 45 U.S. ethanol plants that sell CO2 have idled or cut production, said Renewable Fuels Association Chief Executive Geoff Cooper. 

CO2 suppliers to beer brewers have increased prices by about 25% due to reduced supply, said Bob Pease, chief executive officer of the Brewers Association. The trade group represents small and independent U.S. craft brewers, who get about 45% of their CO2 from ethanol producers. 

“The problem is accelerating. Every day we’re hearing from more of our members about this,” said Pease, who expects some brewers to start cutting production in two to three weeks. 

In an April 7 letter to Vice President Mike Pence, the Compressed Gas Association (CGA) said production of CO2 had fallen about 20% and could be down by 50% by mid-April without relief, CGA CEO Rich Gottwald said in the letter. Meat producers are also feeling the pinch, as they use CO2 in processing, packaging, preservation and shipment. 

Orion Melehan, CEO of Santa Cruz, California-based LifeAID, a specialty beverage company, said two of his production partners are looking for alternative CO2 sources. 

“It does have us up at night figuring out what our options are,” Melehan said. “It highlights the laws of unintended consequences.” 

A spokeswoman for National Beverage Corp, whose products include LaCroix, said the company sources from a number of national CO2 suppliers and does not anticipate a supply issue. 

Coca-Cola Co, SodaStream owner PepsiCo Inc , wine and beer seller Constellation Brands Inc and several bottling companies did not respond to requests for comment 

Walker Modic, environmental and social sustainability manager for Bell’s Brewery, said the Comstock, Michigan-based brewing company had “not experienced any curtailments or changes in the source of our CO2.” 

Denmark-based Carlsberg Group said that the company is “almost self-sufficient.” 

“We, in line with our sustainability program, create our own CO2 and capture it during the brewing process,” spokesman Kasper Elbjorn.

Read the original story here.