A week of news on ethanol and hunger

(Photo of cornfield from Flickr and photographer vampire_bear)

Weekly Angst: Not long ago some touted ethanol as an answer to fossil fuels. The Bush administration said it could save us from our “dependence on foreign oil.” In the U.S., for now, ethanol means corn – that’s what’s being produced and it’s popular in farm states like Iowa and Illinois. But scientists have pointed out life-cycle carbon emissions from corn ethanol are about as bad as from gasoline – and its potential supply is limited. Even Bush recognizes we need to move quickly to non-food, cellulosic products and the new Energy Bill calls for that to happen. But, recently an even greater concern has arisen. Corn prices have skyrocketed, farmers are switching from other crops, like wheat and soybeans, and now they are soaring in price too. Hunger on the rise as food costs grow and supply can’t meet demand. A series of news items over the past week tell us where we are right now with this dilemma.

News item: Midwest drought could spike food, gas prices
Increased dependence on corn and other grains for feed, food and fuel leaves the country vulnerable to a weather catastrophe that could cut supply and push prices up even more. The price of corn is already up 20% this year. Corn could reach $8/bushel (from $5.40 now) if a drought or heat wave hits the Midwest, experts say. A problem could occur as early as this summer, as global warming and La Niña increase the likelihood of drought. (LA Times, 3/2)

News item: Tough times for ethanol force shakeout
High corn prices are squeezing profits at small ethanol distillers. Production capacity nearly doubled in the past year to 8 billion gallons a year, but the high price of corn, and of natural gas to run the distilleries, is leading to consolidation and some bankruptcies. There are also problems getting the product to customers. While farmers benefit, profits for ethanol companies hit a low in November, surged briefly when Congress passed the Energy Bill, and now are dropping again. (Reuters PlanetArk 3/3)

News item: UN warns of ‘new hunger’ as food prices surge
A perfect storm of high food and oil prices, low food supplies, climate change, demand from China and India, and diverting crops to biofuel are causing a food crisis, the executive director of the UN World Food Programme said. The “newly hungry” have money but will be priced out of the food market, adding to the 25,000 worldwide who die each day from hunger now. Record food prices are likely to continue for several years and will cause social unrest and anarchy in the streets, she warned. Afghanistan is one of the most vulnerable nations. One solution is to use more land for food, less for biofuel, she said. (PlanetArk, 3/3)

News item: U.S. won’t meet its ethanol mandate, EIA says
It’s unlikely we’ll meet the Energy Bill ethanol mandate of 36 billion gallons/year by 2022 because of the lack of “advanced” cellulosic ethanol, the Energy Information Administration told a Senate committee. Instead EIA foresees 32.5 billions gallons/year. Most U.S. ethanol is now made from corn, with only small production from switchgrass, wood chips and other agricultural and forest waste, boding ill for the future. The projection assumes the end of tariffs on ethanol imports and significant supply coming from abroad. (PlanetArk, 3/5)

News item: California company begins cellulosic refinery
Ethanol company BlueFire will soon build a cellulosic refinery next to a landfill in Lancaster, Calif., to make ethanol from grass clippings, tree trimmings, and other biomass. The goal is to produce 3.5 million gallons by the end of the year, and eventually 17 million gallons a year. By 2011, the company hopes to be building 5 refineries a year, with a capacity of 55 million gallons each. The federal government is providing up to $385 million to BlueFire and 5 other companies for capital costs to build cellulosic refineries. (Greenwire, 3/3)

Tar sands oil disaster for planet

A top Canadian official has asked the U.S. to go slow in plans to cut greenhouse gas emissions. What’s THAT about?

It’s about the Alberta tar sands, and the desire to keep us buying their synthetic oil made by a filthy, messy process that:
• destroys thousands of miles of pristine forests and wetlands
• releases 3 times the carbon dioxide into the air as conventional oil
• digs up 2-4 tons of earth to produce each barrel of oil
• burns enough natural gas each day to heat a million homes
• takes 3 barrels of water from the shrinking Athabasca River for each barrel of oil
• generates 2 barrels of toxic waste for each barrel of oil, stored in holding lagoons so big they can be seen from space
• leaves the land spoiled instead of reclaiming it
• smells like rotten eggs.

Matthew Simmons, author of “Twilight in the Desert” calls the process “atrocious.” Al Gore says it’s “truly nuts.”

The tars sands are Canada’s fastest growing GHG emissions source and one reason it’s not meeting its Kyoto targets.

Show me the money
Why would anyone make such a mess to produce oil? Money, that’s why. Tar sands became economically viable in 2003. Investors are piling on ($52 billion with much more expected), and the Canadian government stands to make $51 billion in taxes by 2020, while Alberta province will get $44 billion. Not surprising they haven’t done an impact assessment.

And we’re the enabler because we’re buying almost all their exports, to the tune of $73 billion a year. Why? To reduce our reliance on Middle East oil. Canada is now our biggest supplier, at 16% of our total. They want to sell us much more, and together the countries plan to increase production 5-fold.

To make matters worse, refiners here at home are trying to expand to refine the stuff and build pipelines to bring it in. The Sierra Club and other environmental groups have fought permits in several states, including Ill., Ind. (remember the row with Chicago over the Whiting plant?), Michigan, Ohio and Wis.

The basics
Tars sands, re-branded “oil sands” by the industry, is also found in Venezuela. About 20% is near the surface and mined in open pits by giant equipment. The remainder is far underground and recovered by injecting steam into the earth to melt the tar (or bitumen) so it’s thin enough to pump up. Then impurities are removed in an energy-intensive process. The Canadian government wants to replace the natural gas that powers the operation with 20 nuclear reactors.

Alberta is sitting on the second largest reserves in the world, after Saudi Arabia. It is producing 1.25 million barrels a day from its tar sands, an amount expected to triple by 2016. China, another likely market, has invested in two companies there.

But tars sands are not the only source of “unconventional” or synthetic oil. Oil shale and coal-to-liquid are other means to make a dirtier form of oil that produces more GHG and could tear up OUR landscape.

Why even mess with this stuff, when there are cleaner forms of energy like wind, solar, geothermal and cellulosic ethanol. We should be investing in those, as well as cutting waste and driving electric cars. But we’d better get busy. Because tar sands are clearly on a tear.

Note: "Highway to Hell" is a compelling account of work at the large Ft. McMurray tar sands in northern Alberta in OnEarth magazine online.
For more on tar sands, see Climate Progress

(Sources: Washington Post, OnEarth, PlanetArk, Sierra Club, Natural Resources Defense Council, World Watch Institute, E&E Daily, E&E News PM, Tar Sands Watch/Cleveland Plain Dealer and Oil Sands Truth)

(Photo of the Alberta tar sands courtesy of Flickr and photographer Gord McKenna)