NRDC Launches Good Vs. Bad Biofuels Campaign

5 Comments Posted by Joanna Schroeder – May 1st, 2009

A new campaign funded by the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) has created controversy in the biofuels industry. The campaign was developed, according to a blog post by Nathanael Greene, “to sharpen the distinction between biofuels done right and biofuels done wrong.” The campaign cites that ethanol plants using coal power is “wrong” as well as biofuels that “pillage” natural resources are done “wrong”. How to do them right? Use crops like switchgrass that use less water and fertilizer.

Sean O’Hanlon, the executive director of the American Biofuels Council (ABC), responded to the campaign by noting that NRDC made an error in that they just made themselves feedstock specific.

However, in an article published by OPIS, Greene clarified the intention of the campaign. “Congress and the country are working now to create a clean energy future and grow green jobs. If biofuels are going to be part of that future, we need to get them right. All biofuels — first generation, advanced, cellulosic, algae, you name it — they all need to be done right and measured against strict performance standards.”

“Today, environmental groups are the ones who are dictating what fuels, methodology and technology the biofuels industry should be developing.” said O’Hanlon. “What the biofuels industry should have been doing from day one is producing its fuel using wind, solar, hydo-electric, and geothermal power.”

O’Hanlon concluded by saying, “In order to produce biofuels sustainably, there are additional issues we are going to face including water use. The industry needs to start preparing for this now.” There are many experts who would agree that water use is going to come under fire in the next few months. Let’s hope the industry gets out ahead of the issue and doesn’t face another crisis similar to food versus fuel.

related topics: Cellulosic, Energy, Environment, Ethanol

5 Comments »

May 2, 2009 — 10:11 am

Reece

I am even more convinced that the ethanol industry must try to persuade Americans to fall in love with next generation biofuels, to sustain acceptance of first-generation biofuels. The time has passed for trying to convince people that corn makes good fuel. The industry needs to present the future of biofuels, and show people why it is an effective approach. Big hint: this is what the oil companies are doing for oil, and they DO have the $$ billions to spend on public polls and ad testing, so they know it works. This strategy (promote the future of biofuels) was delivered to the top brass of the industry, and they rejected it because of their short-sighted vested interest in corn-based ethanol, and their pride in their farming heritage, which gets in the way of their thinking of themselves as a FUEL suppliers. The NRDC is doing the ethanol industry a favor with this campaign. If they pay attention, they will see that this is a winning approach. It is essential to the long-term survival of the industry. At some point in the future, people will look back and say, “can you believe we used FOOD to make fuel, and we burned COAL to make it?” I am NOT saying that it is a mistake to do so, I am simply saying that the industry needs to understand the public sentiment, and effectively promote the bridge to the future, which is likely to be algae, syngas, or some form of energy-efficient cellulosic ethanol production. This would allow corn ethanol to maintain its role, just as Shell talking about bent straws allows them the public tolerance to still continue platform drilling for oil in the gulf. If they can buy time with PR and advertising, then actually transform their industry to efficient next gen methods, the ethanol industry will survive and thrive. Which is good for all of us, because we WILL need these energy options in the future.

May 2, 2009 — 11:26 am

Chip Daigle

Re: Corn Farmers are Not Evil

Dear Sir:

In general, I like the goal of differentiating between good and bad Ethanol, but we don’t have to label the Corn Ethanol people as Evil. Corn Ethanol, like MBDT was a good, noble idea but we later found better things. Sugarcane, Sweet Sorghum, Energy Cane, Jatropha are much better at reducing our carbon footprint. The Corn Farmers are not evil and still could play an important part of reducing the carbon footprint. We can trade corn, dollar for dollar, to Poor, starving Third World Countries for clean and green ethanol and biodiesel.

We need to:
1. Convert future cars to E85.
2. Convert older cars to E85.
3. Repeal import tariff on clean and green foreign ethanol and biodiesel from jatropha and sugarcane.
4. Trade corn, dollar for dollar, for clean and green ethanol and biodiesel from jatropha and sugarcane.
5. Mix gasoline only with clean and green ethanol from clean and green sources other than Corn. Even mixing it with Cellulosic would be good if they ever get their act together and quit building “pilot plants” and start building production plants.
6. Keep E10 Pumps and start installing E85 pumps all across the country following the Brazil model of reducing carbon emissions 90%.
7. As cars and trucks become modified to E85 Flex Fuel, start raising the mandate to CE20, CE30, CE40, etc. but keep the CE10 pumps for older engines that cant be modified. Do not raise the Ethanol mandates before the cars and trucks are modified. This would be stupid, naïve, and irresponsible. (CE stands for Clean Ethanol, not Cellulosic. They are still scratching their heads waiting for the Big Fat Obama Wedding and Tarp Bailout money.)
8. Build Civilian Stratigic Petroleum Reserves in CA and NY to store Clean and Green E85. This will actually make our country stronger more safe from Gasoline spikes, unlike letting the Gitmo detainees back out on the battlefield. Keep hands off of the Military’s Stratigic Petroleum Reserve to keep us safe.
9. Build an E85 Pipeline from NY to CA.

Chip Daigle
Mandeville, LA

May 6, 2009 — 10:52 am

New EPA Rules for Renewable Fuel Standard

Domestic Fuel

The Zimmcomm Network

Archives

Categories