The well-oiled anti-ethanol lobby apparently called the editors of USA Today and told them it was their turn today to jump on the attack, with a story on a weeks-old RAND Corporation report questioning the cost benefits of E85 fuel. A few points to consider:
First, the science and technology behind biofuels and other alternatives is constantly shifting and improving, so such studies only offer a shapshot view of little to no real value.
Second, some aspects of researching and developing any and all non-petroleum alternatives are difficult to quantify in an economic sense. A brief look at whether E85 may or may not cost more to a consumer is only a look at one side of an issue that has so many other dimensions of more significance.
The latest volley against ethanol was fired this week by the Wall Street Journal in an article which has prompted blog commentary all over the internet.
The phrase which came to my mind reading the article was the famous quote by Mark Twain after hearing that his obituary had been published in the New York Journal - “Reports of my death have been greatly exaggerated.”
As one commentator in the Daily Republic noted, “The Wall Street Journal all but announced the death of biofuels.”
“Ethanol Craze Cools As Doubts Multiply,” reads the headline of the obituary in the newspaper that, famously, failed to foresee the 1987 stock market crash, the dot com bust of 2000 and the great mortgage meltdown of 2007.
I used to love to start my writing day by taking a poke or two at the corn-based ethanol industry — you know, the biggest greenwash ever.
These days, the debunking of corn fuel almost seems like it’s piling on. Today, two major newspapers — the LA Times and The Wall Street Journal — ran front-page stories that essentially say: everyone hates government support for corn-based ethanol, except for people with a direct financial (or political) stake in it.
I just can’t think of any other product or commodity that has had such a relentless attack on it. It’s really amazing when you think about it. What I don’t understand is why people can’t recognize corn ethanol as the starting point that it is? Most of the anti-ethanol criticism comes from those who see corn ethanol as an end, rather than a means. Getting the infrastructure in place and creating demand are an important means to building an alternative fuel industry in the country.
Mark Twain also said of his exaggerated death, “I didn’t attend the funeral, but I sent a nice letter saying I approved of it.” I think the ethanol industry will pass on its funeral.
In typical glass-is-half-empty reportage, Wednesday’s Wall Street Journal featured a front-page story on ethanol that emphasized the negative while skirting around all the positive sides of the issue that would have made for a much more balanced discussion. It is sad that a paper the caliber of the Journal would recite, without checking the facts, the usual litany of complaints and urban myths.
The fact is, without bothering to repeat the negatives, corn growing has become more sustainable, with fertilizer, herbicides and insecticide use on the decrease, as well as tillage and irrigation. What is most exacerbating is that the Journal cites Big Oil and certain livestock organizations as ethanol critics, without going into detail about how their concern is more about their own pocketbooks than protecting the environment or promoting energy security.
The National Corn Growers Association had an opportunity to share its side of the story with the newspaper. Unfortunately, the newspaper did not deem it worthwhile to share it with its readers.
Perhaps more unfortunate, however, is that the story distorted the American Lung Association’s position on ethanol. One official of the ALA in Minnesota had this to say on a few blogs (here and here, for example):
... the American Lung Association of the Upper Midwest has led a nationally-recognized E85 (an ethanol-based alternative fuel that can be used in flex-fuel vehicles) pilot program since 1998. We remain a strong supporter of E85 and biodiesel, both of which have been tested and approved by the Environmental Protection Agency as cleaner-burning alternatives to traditional petroleum fuels.
While we’re still in a thanksgiving spirit it’s good to know that there are a lot of people who think America’s corn growers are doing a good job. They’re willing to speak out and say so too. For example, take James Garner:
“Many Americans don’t realize that we enjoy the safest, most affordable food supply in the world, thanks to our country’s farmers,” Garner says. “This year, our corn growers are also helping us to solidify a more secure energy future by also producing corn for cleaner-burning renewable ethanol. I hope others will join me in thanking corn growers for helping fill our grocery shelves and still filling our cars with renewable fuel.”
If you haven’t already told everyone in your personal contact list about it then please make sure you direct them to Farmers Matter. It’s a place where there’s lots of good information and consumers can also leave their own message thanking farmers this holiday season by participating in a video contest and entering to win $1,500.
A Washington Post reporter asked the musical question “What’s So Bad About Corn?” in an article that features Iowa Corn Growers Association president Tim Recker and Iowa Corn Promotion Board chairman Julius Schaaf.
“I got 225-bushel corn that I’m doing right now, which is phenomenal,” Recker said by cellphone from a field near the town of Arlington. That’s 225 bushels per acre. For a corn farmer, that’s living in the tall cotton.
And yet, despite the fabulous harvest and the boom in ethanol made from corn, corn farmers often sound beleaguered and aggrieved. Corn, they say, has been getting a bad rap.
“You have to wear a flak jacket,” said Bill Couser, who farms 5,000 acres here in the central Iowa town of Nevada (pronounced ne-VAY-da). “When we planted this crop, people said we were the villains of the world.”
The article, which talks about the criticisms leveled against both corn and corn ethanol, does a pretty good job of presenting both sides of the issue.
“The thing about ethanol: It’s not a perfect solution for our energy, but it’s a pretty good one. You don’t throw out the good in search of the perfect,” said Julius Schaaf, who farms 4,000 acres in Randolph, Iowa, and is chairman of the Iowa Corn Promotion Board.
A subject that is very misunderstood when it comes to growing corn is fertilizer. Here’s another installment of our Corn Commentary video series that was produced at the recent National Association of Farm Broadcasting convention. In it NCGA CEO Rick Tolman helps you better understand what’s going on in corn production as it relates to fertilizer. For example, Rick says that people hear that corn uses more fertilizer than any other crop. He says that’s because corn is planted on more acres than any other crop. That’s why the totality of fertilizer usage is higher. However, if you look at fertilizer use on a per unit basis corn is really middle of the road compared to other crops.
Rick also points to a white paper on corn production sustainability that you can download from their website. Here’s an excerpt relating to this topic:
The latest advances in agriculture technology enable farmers to apply fertilizers with pinpoint accuracy, minimizing their impact to soil, water and air. For example, the use of enhanced efficiency fertilizers, such as slow- and controlled-release fertilizers and stabilized nitrogen fertilizers, are helping to protect the environment by reducing nutrient losses and improving nutrient efficiency while improving crop yields.
One of the clearest measures of sustainable agriculture production is increasing efficiency, with the ability to swell output while decreasing inputs. According to USDA, growers use less nitrogen to produce over 50 percent more corn than in 1980. Furthermore, over the past 15 years, farmers experienced a 17 percent increase in nitrogen efficiency as measured by bushels of corn produced per pound of nitrogen applied which in turn means less nutrients lost to runoff.
At the National Association of Farm Broadcasting convention NCGA’s Rick Tolman took time to dispell some myths about the use of water by the corn industry. He’s got some great facts and figures to explain why the numbers being bantered about as doomsday speak are really meaningless when put in perspective with the information those same people don’t say or want you to know.
* More than 85% of all corn produced in the United States is non-irrigated. So, that 4,000 gallons per bushel is mostly rainfall. That rain is going to fall on the land whether it has corn on it or asphalt or marijuana. According to the USGS (U.S. National Geological Survey), if that same land was instead in wheat, it would take 11,000 gallons per bushel. If it were in alfalfa, it would take 15,000 gallons for a similar amount. If it is a paved parking lot, the same amount of rain still falls. So, one perhaps important point left out by the good bug doctor and the headline writers is that most of the water corn needs is not being sucked from the ground or from rivers, but it actually falls from the sky.
* And, looking even deeper, according to the same USGS, an acre of corn actually gives off 4,000 gallons a day in “evapotranspiration,” the combined result of transpiration and evaporation. Over the course of a growing season that would equate to turning that acre of corn into a lake approximately 11 inches deep. Corn is a very remarkable plant. It gives back much of that water it takes up. That water goes up into atmosphere to start the precipitation cycle all over again. In aggregate, the corn crop actually returns more water to the atmosphere than is withdrawn from ground or surface for irrigation.
* Some other USGS statistics that might be of interest and add perspective:
It takes 1,500 gallons of water to produce a barrel of beer
It takes 1,851 gallons of water to refine a barrel of crude oil
It takes 62,600 gallons of water to process a ton of cane sugar to make processed sugar
It takes 62,600 gallons to make a ton of steel
It takes 2,075 gallons of water to make four tires
They won’t come out and say we’re at peak oil, but they are admitting oil is getting harder and more expensive to reach. A Wall Street Journal story this week reports that oil industry chiefs do believe there is a practical limit on the amount of oil that can be produced each day. That certainly underscores the need for corn ethanol and renewable fuels. For some interesting insight on the piece, check out “More Evidence We’ve Entered the End of Oil” on Wired’s blog.
In case you missed it, Bob Lutz, GM’s product guru, took on the Union of Concerned Scientists and the American Petroleum Institute at a meeting of the Western Automotive Journalists in San Franscisco. A BusinessWeek article notes that when asked about the wisdom of E85, Lutz took a swipe at API by charging the big oil interest is running a multi-million dollar smear campaign against ethanol:
“They make it sound like ethanol is taking food out of the mouths of babes. According to them, we’re going to have taco riots in Mexico because of ethanol.”
If you did not see the documentary about corn on the History Channel’s Modern Marvels Monday night, go buy yourself a copy online. It’s well worth the 25 bucks. Buy a bunch for your corn grower friends for Christmas. It will make them proud.
It was almost too good. It did touch on a couple of negatives very briefly - like how high fructose corn syrup is making us all fat - but the overall positive tone was incredibly refreshing. Corn growers should watch this and just beam with pride at what a truly amazing modern marvel they are producing.
Pioneer should be pretty pleased with the show. Chairman Dean Oestreich and other company representatives did a great job of explaining different varieties of corn, how they select for traits, the benefits of Bt corn and more. Great stuff.
Not sure if you can watch it online at the History Channel site, but - seriously - this is a great Christmas present for anyone in the corn industry.
The latest volley against ethanol was fired this week by the 
A Washington Post reporter asked the musical question “What’s So Bad About Corn?” in 
If you did not see the documentary about corn on the