The Politico reports that "rural Democrats are threatening to vote against climate change legislation unless the Environmental Protection Agency halts new proposals that could hamper the development of corn ethanol."  Recently the EPA released a report finding that changes in land use worldwide indirectly related to increased corn ethanol production in the U.S. could disqualify the biofuel as a renewable fuel.

As a result, House Ag Chair Collin Peterson of Minnesota and 26 Democrats on the Ag Committee have said they will vote against President Obama's climate change bill. Peterson told the New York Times that as many as 45 Ds will vote against the bill.  Meanwhile, in the Senate, Chuck Grassley of Iowa has introduced legislation that would remedy the situation (from the pro-ethanol point of view).

The EPA has counted "indirect land use" to show that ethanol has little effect on reducing global warming pollution. What's that? Politico's example is that changes in which crops are planted in the U.S. could result in changes in crops planted worldwide. More corn planted in the U.S. could result in increased deforestation of rain forests in South America, for example. U.S. farmers (and farm-state politicians) object to this kind of calculation, which requires U.S. farmers to be responsible for land use decisions made on other continents. Farm Policy reports that deforestation in Brazil has actually fallen over the last five years, and that the country reports that it can triple its grain and beef production without having to cut down a single tree. 

President Obama used a resurrected former Maytag plant now producing wind-energy towers to announce Wednesday the leasing of federal waters for projects to generate electricity from wind as well as from ocean currents and other renewable sources. In his first trip to Iowa as President, Obama commemorated Earth Day at Trinity Structural Towers in Newton, where just after noon (above), he delivered a major energy policy speech before about 200 people, including plant workers, elected officials and others. The major news item in the speech: the opening of federal waters for offshore wind-energy development.

“This will open the door to major investments in offshore clean energy,” Obama said. “For example, there is enormous interest in wind projects off the coasts of New Jersey and Delaware and today’s announcement will enable these projects to move forward.” According to Obama, it is estimated that if the United States fully pursues its potential for wind energy on land and offshore, wind can generate as much as 20 percent of the nation’s electricity by 2030, creating as many as 250,000 jobs in the process.

Iowa is second only to Texas in installed wind capacity, which more than doubled last year alone. In 2000, energy technology represented just one half of one percent of all venture capital investments nationally. Today, it’s more than 10 percent, the president noted. “It wasn’t too long ago that Maytag closed its operations in Newton,” Obama said. “Hundreds of jobs were lost.  To have walked these floors then would have been to walk along empty corridors. The only signs of a once-thriving enterprise would have been the markings on cement in the shape of equipment that was boxed up and carted away.” When completed, the wind towers, which were resting behind Obama as he spoke, will hold aloft blades that can generate as much as 2.5 megawatts of electricity. 

Douglas Burns

For news about coal mining, we turn to Ken Ward, Jr., and the Charleston (WVA) Gazette, and the news was swirling yesterday that the federal Environmental Protection Agency was going to more closely scrutinize permits that use mountaintop removal mining techniques. In this kind of mining, the tops of mountains are blasted, scrapped off and pushed into the valleys (and streams) below, exposing the coal seam. Ward reported that EPA wasn't blocking permits, but it was reviewing its position on whether this kind of mining violated existing laws.

EPA's move confused everyone. Coal interests warned of massive unemployment. Environmental groups declared victory. The EPA said Monday that its position on mountaintop mining was "in a state of transition." Today, in his Coal Tattoo blog, Ward reports that EPA may be starting to slow mountaintop mining, but "we don't know how much of a crackdown it's eventually going to turn out to be."

Ward reviews the history of mountaintop mining — and by the end of his article, we're not so sure what is likely to happen. The Louisville Courier-Journal quoted President Obama as saying, "I will tell you that there's some pretty country up there that's been torn up pretty good." Ward notes that on two different mine permits, Obama's EPA has taken two entirely different positions on mountaintop mining. So which position will EPA eventually take? We'll have to wait — and read Coal Tattoo.