Growth Energy Responds to Cornell Paper
The debate rages on regarding ethanol’s greenhouse gas emission reductions (GHGs) as compared to conventional gasoline. Today, Growth Energy came out against two Cornell University professors’ recent paper that criticizes the Environmental Protection Agency’s calculations that grain ethanol boasts a lower GHG than gas.
Harry de Gorter and David R. Just, professors of Applied Economics and Management, will have their findings published in the inaugural March issue of the peer-reviewed journal, Applied Economics Perspectives and Policy, Vol. 32, Issue 1, Oxford University Press. The article, “The Social Costs and Benefits of Biofuels: The Intersection of Environmental, Energy, and Agricultural Policy,” criticizes both corn-based ethanol’s GHG reductions as well as ethanol subsidies and mandates.
Tom Buis, Growth Energy’s CEO stated, “What it appears these two professors at Cornell would have us do is maintain the status quo – keep our addiction to oil, no matter what the cost to our economy in lost jobs and money we send overseas, no matter what the cost to our environment, no matter what the cost to our national security.”
“The Cornell paper is pretzel logic at its worst. The truth is that when we fuel up with domestic ethanol in the U.S., we need less gasoline refined from carbon-heavy oil. And the science on this is clear: a peer-reviewed study published by Yale University found that grain ethanol is 59 percent cleaner than gasoline – with cellulosic ethanol 86 percent cleaner than gasoline,” continued Buis.
Buis concluded, “Academic studies, government agencies and independent papers have concluded that innovation and new technology in the ethanol industry is bringing us ever closer to a high-tech domestic fuel that can contribute significantly to cleaning our skies, while creating jobs and strengthening our national security.”










4 Comments »
Tim Dillard
One wonders whether Mr. Buis even read the paper… Since the paper may be too academic for a lobbyist to read, I suggest he should listen to the podcast at http://www.oxfordjournals.org/our_journals/aepp/podcast.html
Worldwide Oil Subsidies Could Top $500 Billion - Domestic Fuel
[...] response to this early draft, Tom Buis, with Growth Energy, an organization that represents the US ethanol industry said, “This study confirms what millions of Americans have known all along. Our addiction to [...]
Worldwide Oil Subsidies Could Top $500 Billion
[...] response to this early draft, Tom Buis, with Growth Energy, an organization that represents the US ethanol industry said, “This study confirms what millions of Americans have known all along. Our addiction to oil [...]
Chip Daigle
Mr Buis makes a good point that it is in our national interest to make Ethanol here to reduce our dependency on Foreign oil. If our young, naïve, irresponsible President and his Cronie Dems in Congress could just require all new vehicles be E85 Flex Fuel vehicles then we would be well on our way to being immune to spikes in the price of Oil because of some fake crisis in the mid East. We could simply flip the switch and add more Ethanol to our fuel to get through the crisis.
What Mr Buis fails to mention is that Corn Ethanol made with Coal only gets 10% CO2 reduction, and if it is made with Natural Gas Burners it gets only 25% CO2 Reduction. The 59% and the 85% figures are a switch bait tactic and have nothing to do with Corn Ethanol. On the other hand, Gen 1 Sugarcane Ethanol gets a whopping 85% CO2 Reduction from Gasoline. CO2 is the major pollutant in our air. The Cornell study compares the total GHG’s from Gasoline to Ethanol, and ignores the fact that CO2 is clearly more significant than other GHG’s. Because of that, I have to give them an F on their paper.
Comments RSS feed — TrackBack URI
Leave a Comment