Monday, February 13, 2012

The Corn Divide Splits Rural America's Politics

07/28/2008

Sen. Barack Obama pledged his allegiance to corn and ethanol last year in Adel, Iowa. His opponent, Sen. John McCain, opposes ethanol fuel mandates.
Photo: Obama Campaign

Forget Republican or Democratic. The political divide growing in many states is based on corn — and that division is cutting through the middle of rural America.

Candidates are falling on either side of the ethanol divide. Should the country require greater use of corn-based ethanol or should those mandates be dissolved? Those who support the mandates contend ethanol is a way to lessen dependence on imported oil. Those who say the mandates ought to be removed contend using food for fuel is one of the reasons grocery prices are rising.

The first group is composed of corn growers and rural regions where ethanol plants have been built. The second group is filled with those who buy corn: cattle raisers, chicken feeders and food producers.

Republican or Democrat matters less than whether you represent a corn state or a livestock region. It's an issue that has more to do with geography and rural economies than with ideology.

Gov. Matt Blunt of Missouri, largely a corn state, denied a request in mid-June by Kansas City (stockyard central) that it should be exempt from the state's ethanol mandate. Texas Gov. Rick Perry, meanwhile, operates in a state filled with cattle raisers and poultry producers. So he has petitioned the federal government to ease ethanol mandates.

The Republican Party in Texas has largely lined up against federal requirements that the country use more ethanol. The state's two senators, John Cornyn and Kay Bailey Hutchison, have joined Perry. Sen. Hutchison has introduced legislation calling for a freeze of the federal mandate at the current level. The legislation was co-signed by 11 other Republicans, including the party's presidential nominee, Arizona Sen. John McCain.

Republicans were promptly rewarded for their stand. The chairman of Pilgrim's Pride chicken processing operation in northeast Texas donated $100,000 to the Republican Governors Association (which Perry currently chairs). Bo Pilgrim also paid more than $9,000 in airfare for Gov. Rick Perry and three aides to attend a news conference called to promote a waiver of the federal ethanol mandate. Pilgrim also gave $25,000 to Perry's political action committee.

Republican governors were hardly unified on ethanol, however. Gov. Tim Pawlenty of Minnesota (yes, a corn state) said "corn-based and commodities-based ethanol for states like Minnesota has been a success story." South Carolina Gov. Mark Sanford (chicken state), meanwhile, said the federal mandate was a "totally bogus government mandate."

Missouri state treasurer Sarah Steelman, a Republican, opposes ethanol mandates. Her opponent in the Republican gubernatorial primary, Rep. Kenny Hulshof, favors them.

The corn divide is most evident in the Missouri governor's race. In the Republican primary (the election is August 5th), the leading candidates have split on either side of the corn divide. Missouri state treasurer Sarah Steelman has been campaigning against the ethanol mandates. Her Republican opponent, U.S. Rep. Kenny Hulshof of Columbia, has backed the mandates.

The ethanol issue cuts rural Missouri in half. "A rift has started to develop in Missouri's agricultural community between the row-crop farmers who dominate northern Missouri and the Bootheel and the livestock ranchers who are most common in the southern part of the state," according to an Associated Press report. So, Steelman has been on a bus tour of southern Missouri (a heavily Republican area).

The controversy has benefited Democrat Jay Nixon, the Missouri attorney general. Nixon is a corn backer and ethanol supporter. The Missouri Corn Growers Association is holding a fundraiser for Nixon at the end of the month.

And then, in the presidential race, corn starkly divides the two candidates. McCain opposes the ethanol mandate (which makes Minnesota's pro-ethanol Tim Pawlenty an interesting vice presidential choice). Sen. Barack Obama, however, supports ethanol. (The headline in the New York Times in late June was "Obama Camp Closely Linked With Ethanol.") Obama, the Democrat, supports the federal ethanol mandate and he opposes removal of a tariff on imported biofuels from Brazil. (Early in his senate career Obama rode for low rates on a jet owned by Archer Daniels Midland, an ethanol producer.) McCain thinks the tariff on Brazilian biofuels should be removed.

Obama's stand will certainly put him in opposition with environmental groups that oppose large-scale ethanol production. For rural America, however, the split has less to do with free trade and more to do with whether you see row crops or pasture when you look out the kitchen window.

Comments

Roadside

Driving through northern Arkansas and southern Missouri yesterday, I saw more than one gas station boasting "OUR GAS IS ETHANOL FREE."

Corn ethanol

There's a couple of issues that both sides of this debate seem to forget: first, corn is a terrible alternative fuel, since it takes nearly as much energy to produce as it gives, a net energy gain of around 12%. Secondly, it pollutes more than regular gasoline does. Thirdly, more corn means more pollution via farm chemicals, which is also a terrible side effect (cotton still reigns first in total chemical use, usiing around 50% of all chemicals on farmland - a great reason to raise hemp instead of cotton, like almost every other country in the world does, including Canada. There's even a Republican Senator from North Dakota who's been lobbying hard to get hemp production legalized in America, which I heartily support. Hemp is a much better fabric than cotton - stronger, lasts longer, is used for various medicines, etc., requires little or NO chemicals, and is actually GOOD for the soil). From the articles I've read and the research I've done, it seems the corn farmers aren't really doing that well; rising prices for diesel, etc. have cut into their profits. Soybeans are a much better alternative for fuel, as it costs much less to produce and provides a much greater energy return. Switchgrass, etc. should be funded and pursued as much better alternatives for fuel than corn. Just some "food for thought" - -

Algal oil to replace oil seed oil as feedstock for biodiesel

The so-called “ethanol controversy” is bogus. The so-called controversy is simply a dodge, a farce, a missive, and a bore. There is a much better way to grow our own oil. No herbicides, no pesticides, no "politico-cides". Here are just the plain facts. Algae can grow in a wide variety of colonies, almost anywhere, and eat from a wide variety of nutrients. See my article posted herein -- Prospects for the Biodiesel Industry. Oboma is right on ethanol in that his stand in favor is based on growing our own fuel and not depending so much of foreign oil. McCain has it right in that we should drop the tariff on ethanol based on sugar cane, from any country. It takes the energy from one gallon of oil to produce the 85% of the energy from that same gallon when we put it into our gas tank in the form of gasoline. Petro oil is a net loss fuel, whereas oil from soy is a net gain in terms of calories per gallon. The heat made from soy via biodiesl is 1.30 times the heat from petro fuel it takes to grow and process the soy oil into biodieel. Under the most inefficient conditions, algal oil has a net energy gain ratio of 1: 3.21, that its it takes the energy from one gallon of petro oil to produce the 3.21 times the energy in the form of algal oil-based biodiesel. Further, we can almost eliminate the use of petro-based fuels in the production of algal oil based fuels. Biodiesel from algal oil has as close to neutral carbon foot print as we can get. Algae absorb CO2 while growing, and then emits the same amount of CO2 when it is burned. Algal oil can be used straight as a fuel for oil-fired furnaces and boilers. It can be used as cooking oil, in soaps and lotions and as a de-greaser. So why have the polticos stayed away from algal oil-based biodiesel? Go ask them and you get back a glassy stare -- like "what are you talking about -- there's no such thing as algal oil based biodiesel". True as to the millions of gallons of petro-based fuels we use. That can change. We can grow algae in covered ponds on soil which cannot support any plants but sage brush and rattle snakes. We can use the biodiesel to produce the heat to drive the transesterification reaction to the right. Rice University scientists are close to using enzymes on just about any biomass to produce ethanol. So, why are our Presidential candidates not informed about the state of science and engineering of producing algal oil for biodiesel? Answer: There is more campaign money flowing toward maintaining a "problem" than in finding a solution. Once the problem is solved, the flow of money on that issue stops. Both candidates are using a bogus issue to raise money for their campaigns. So what else is new? Jim Miller jimmiller5417-at-yahoo.com

PROSPECTS FOR THE BIODIESEL INDUSTRY

Where we've been. The biodiesel industry has reached a crisis point. The demand for biodiesel has promoted the construction of a large number of biodiesel plants. These refineries use the oils from many plants, but especially soy. The cost of seed oil has risen dramatically because of the rise in petrodiesel costs to farm and the demand for ethanol as an additive to gasoline. Ethanol is used in the processing of biodiesel. In Europe, many of the biodiesel plants have been moth-balled because of the high cost of oil seed oil. Imperim Renewables, Gray's Harbor WA, is finishing a 100,000 million gallon per year plant, with no assured source of vegetable oil. They are reluctant to import palm oil because of the adverse ecological impact of the palm plantations. Other refineries are facing the same supply issues. The favored source of oil, algal oil, has been touted as the liquid fuel source of the future – and indeed it is. Most early investors put their money up to fund the construction of algae farms. Guess what? They proved they could grow algae using a wide variety of technologies. Where we're at. Slowly, it dawned on these producers and their investors, that while they could successfully grow algae, they had only very inefficient means of extracting the oil from the algae cells. The universities were of no help since most of their funding was to discover ways of growing algae and tweaking the DNA. None have developed any new technologies to extract the oil in a continuous, large volume process. There are ways of fracturing the algae cell to get at the lipids floating around in the cytoplasm. Heat, pressure drop, impingement, solvents, crushing, grinding with small ceramic bebees – all have been tried. Yet much of the technology, derived from the lab bench was not scalable to commercial standards, except at great cost and poor results. AlgalOilDiesel to the rescue. We are a small group of highly energized professionals who have found the technological “sweet spot” for harvesting the Chlorella vulgaris cells and extracting the algal oil. Included in our talent mix are mechanical engineers, an agricultural engineer, a computer scientist, a lawyer, airline owners and an biodiesel plant design-and-build specialist. The process of harvesting the mature “parent” cells and returning the “daughter” cells to the head of the growing system has been solved. The opening of the Chlorella cell is done by osmotic rupture, leaving the cell wall intact, looking like an opened flower. The cytoplasm and the cell walls are separated and then the lipids (oil) removed, returning the balance of the cytoplasm to the algae production system to add to the nutrient. The cell walls can be dehydrated and sold as a health food supplement or fermented into ethanol. The wash water used to clean the raw biodiesel is laced with Phosphorus and serves as a nutrient. The remaining mechanical issues are: how big do we make the system to handle what quantity of algae? If our clients will tell the quantity, we can build the machinery to handle the clients' request. We are not dealing in rocket science. We are not interested in doing study after study like the universities and think tanks. We want to build the machine the client wants and get it into operation fast. We will stand behind our work and tweak the equipment when necessary. We are constantly on the look-out for new ideas. The technology in this field is a moving target, and we move with it. In terms of scale, our designs will serve two primary markets: The small farmer cooperative of fifteen to fifty members, using at least 100,000 gallons of biodiesel a year, and the larger farm which is producing algae which converts to 10 million gallons of biodiesel a year. While the equipment we build (the cell harvester and the cell rupture machine) are fully scalable, some of the equipment we buy from others has not been scalable, except by installing a bank of units. These units include filters, separators, polishers, and solvent recovery devices. We are working with many of these vendors and encouraging them to scale up their equipment. We have encountered the age old problem of “why invent, develop and make a much larger machine, since no one has demanded such machine”. Before Xerox was invented, no one demand a Xerox copier. We have the science and engineering talent in our firm and the advanced knowledge of where technology should be driven to solve the “Xerox” conundrum. We will not likely be on the front page of the WSJ any time soon. We are not interested in selling out to an oil company, merely to see our patents and technology suppressed. We know that Chlorella divides 2.5 times per hour. The growth/harvest cycle is about ten days as against annually for oil seed crops. We can grow the algae in cover ponds in the middle of winter in Montana on non-crop soils. We can grow it on dry desert lands. We can make our own distilled water. The wash water can be used to grow algae and other crops. The co-product, glycerol, has many profitable uses, despite what you may have read about the glut of raw glycerine on the market. We want to use the “free” energy of geothermal wells, the Sun and wind energy. We want to be as green as we can get with the smallest carbon footprint. Contact information: AlgalOilDiesel, LLP 530 NW 13th St., Corvallis, OR 97330 Landline: 541-757-9797; cell: 541-971-0403; Skype: jimmiller5417 or 541-359- 3676. Attention: James E. Miller