<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
  xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
  xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
  >

<channel>
  <title>Green Options &#187; corn-based ethanol</title>
  <link>http://greenoptions.com/tag/corn-based-ethanol</link>
  <description>Posts tagged 'corn-based ethanol'</description>
  <pubDate>Mon, 20 Oct 2008 14:49:53 +0000</pubDate>
  <generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1</generator>
  <language>en</language>
  <item>
    <title>U.S. Unable to Meet EPA&#8217;s Renewable Fuel Standards?</title>
    <link>http://gas2.org/2008/10/20/us-unable-to-meet-epas-renewable-fuel-standards/</link>
    <comments>http://gas2.org/2008/10/20/us-unable-to-meet-epas-renewable-fuel-standards/#comments</comments>
    <pubDate>Mon, 20 Oct 2008 14:49:53 +0000</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>Adam Shake</dc:creator>
    
		<category><![CDATA[Ethanol]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Policy]]></category>

    <guid isPermaLink="false">http://gas2.org/2008/10/20/us-unable-to-meet-epas-renewable-fuel-standards/</guid>
    <description><![CDATA[<h4><img class="aligncenter size-full wp-image-1152" src="http://go635254.s3.amazonaws.com/gas2/files/2008/10/2414307724_0e0081151a.jpg" alt="" width="500" height="375" /></h4>
<h4>The EPA, through its Renewable Fuel Standards program, has set a pretty idealistic goal for the introduction of cellulosic biofuels, and many are wondering if the goal will be able to be met.</h4>
<p>In its mandate, the EPA has ordered that 36 billion gallons of biofuel be blended into the fuel supply by 2022. That doesn&#8217;t seem like such an unrealistic goal, until you consider that as of this writing, there are no commercial-scale refineries in existence in the United States and no distribution network to move the fuel once it has been developed. With these two roadblocks, 2022 doesn&#8217;t seem so far distant.</p>
<p><a href="http://gas2.org/2008/10/20/us-unable-to-meet-epas-renewable-fuel-standards/" class="more-link">Read more of this story &#187;</a></p>
]]></description>
    <wfw:commentRss>http://gas2.org/2008/10/20/us-unable-to-meet-epas-renewable-fuel-standards/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
  </item>
  <item>
    <title>The EPA Decides It Can Mess With Texas</title>
    <link>http://redgreenandblue.org/2008/08/09/the-epa-decides-it-can-mess-with-texas/</link>
    <comments>http://redgreenandblue.org/2008/08/09/the-epa-decides-it-can-mess-with-texas/#comments</comments>
    <pubDate>Sat, 09 Aug 2008 10:26:33 +0000</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>Jerry James Stone</dc:creator>
    
		<category><![CDATA[Center]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Editor's Choice]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Energy]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Other Politics]]></category>

    <guid isPermaLink="false">http://redgreenandblue.org/2008/08/09/the-epa-decides-it-can-mess-with-texas/</guid>
    <description><![CDATA[<p><img class="alignleft" style="float: left;margin-left: 0px;margin-right: 15px" src="http://www.importers.com/tradeblog/images/corn-to-ethanol.jpg" alt="" width="290" height="340" />The EPA dealt Texas a hard blow on Thursday. It <a href="http://redgreenandblue.org/2008/08/07/epa-denies-texas-request-for-ethanol-waiver/">turned down the state&#8217;s request for a reduction</a> to our Renewable Fuels Standard (RFS). A decision that some environmentalists are sticking in the plus column for biofuels. I can&#8217;t say I agree.</p>
<p>It&#8217;s not that I&#8217;m not on the biofuel bandwagon. I am. Just don&#8217;t run the bandwagon on ethanol. Or any other <a href="http://gas2.org/2008/05/26/genetic-engineering-for-cheaper-cellulosic-ethanol/">bio solution</a> currently available. Yes they all sound very promising. But we need a strong smart solution, not a promise.</p>
<p>I do think it&#8217;s great that biofuels are finally getting real public attention. Especially from the EPA. The agency has so many <a href="http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5hwwsvNZPeVERE_DtCJ5Y4x5xfiYQD927Q2IO0">blemishes on it&#8217;s policy record</a> it warrants the <a href="http://www.proactiv.com/">Proactive Solution</a>. But a hasty push towards a biofuel solution is as bad as doing nothing at all. And that&#8217;s what the RFS is, hasty.</p>
<p>Yes, much has been said about the <a href="http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2001/08/010808135444.htm">sustainability of a corn-based solution</a>. And there is that whole <a href="http://www.drivingethanol.org/ethanol_facts/food-and-fuel.aspx">food for fuel</a> argument, and the <a href="http://www.hybridcarnews.org/entry/corn-fueled-ethanol-boom-is-not-sustainable-warns-scientist/">questionable sustainability of the ubiquitous crop</a>. All of which are good arguments. But for me, it&#8217;s a matter of how were just shifting the burden from petroleum to corn: that&#8217;s not a solution in my book.</p>
<p>And it&#8217;s precisely that burden which is being felt in the Lone Star state: their livestock industry is taking <a href="http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/business/5931493.html">a major hit</a>. Why? Because our Renewable Fuel Standard is about quantity, not quality. The current 2008 standard demands 7.76 percent, which is about 9 billion gallons, of renewable fuel. With a definition of a renewable fuel only being &#8220;<a href="http://epa.gov/oms/renewablefuels/420f07019.htm">the opposite of fossil fuel,</a>&#8221; moving forward to the 2022 standard of 36 billion gallons could be catastrophic.</p>
<p>This is why we cannot afford an EPA Chief who is so myopic. Under Stephen Johnson&#8217;s leadership the agency denied <a href="http://planetsave.com/blog/2008/02/27/epa-chief-on-hot-seat-over-california-emissions-denial/">California the power necessary</a> to meet these somewhat ambigous goals. A decision that has the EPA scrambling to try to save face while the Democrats are <a href="http://redgreenandblue.org/2008/07/30/senators-call-for-epa-chief-johnson-to-step-down/">standing at the castle doors</a> with their pitchforks and torches in tow. It&#8217;s like a scene out of Frankenstein. But unlike Frankenstien, the EPA is far from green.</p>
<h3>Related Posts:</h3>
<p><a title="Group Sues EPA for Inaction on Coal Permit" rel="bookmark" href="../2008/03/19/navajo-group-sues-epa-for-stalling-on-air-permit/">Group Sues EPA for Inaction on Coal Permit</a><br />
<a title="EPA Chief on Hot Seat Over California Emissions Denial" rel="bookmark" href="http://planetsave.com/blog/2008/02/27/epa-chief-on-hot-seat-over-california-emissions-denial/">EPA Chief on Hot Seat Over California Emissions Denial</a><br />
<a title="IPCC’s Report Sparks Protest" rel="bookmark" href="http://claytonbodiecornell.greenoptions.com/2007/05/07/biofuels-will-not-solve-global-warming-ipccs-report-sparks-protest/">Biofuels Will Not Solve Global Warming:  IPCC’s Report Sparks Protest</a></p>
<p>Image source: <a href="http://www.theagcompany.com/blog/">Nik Agarwal</a> at <a href="http://www.theagcompany.com/blog/2007/03/04/brazil-japan-ethanol-agreement/">The Air</a></p>
]]></description>
    <wfw:commentRss>http://redgreenandblue.org/2008/08/09/the-epa-decides-it-can-mess-with-texas/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
  </item>
  <item>
    <title>Drink it or Drive it: The Promise of Agave for Ethanol</title>
    <link>http://cleantechnica.com/2008/08/08/drink-it-or-drive-it-the-promise-of-agave-for-ethanol/</link>
    <comments>http://cleantechnica.com/2008/08/08/drink-it-or-drive-it-the-promise-of-agave-for-ethanol/#comments</comments>
    <pubDate>Fri, 08 Aug 2008 22:23:46 +0000</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>Sarah Lozanova</dc:creator>
    
		<category><![CDATA[agriculture]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[alternative energy]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[transportation]]></category>

    <guid isPermaLink="false">http://cleantechnica.com/2008/08/08/drink-it-or-drive-it-the-promise-of-agave-for-ethanol/</guid>
    <description><![CDATA[<h3><a href="http://cleantechnica.com/files/2008/08/tequila-ethanol.jpg"><img class="alignleft size-full wp-image-826" src="http://go635254.s3.amazonaws.com/cleantechnica/files/2008/08/tequila-ethanol.jpg" alt="gas prices" width="300" height="200" /></a>Corn has given ethanol a bad name and scientists are searching far and wide for alternative feedstock. Agave has been getting attention lately and looks very promising, although tequila connoisseurs may not be cheering.  Here’s why agave is so much appealing:</h3>
<h4><strong>High Yield Per Acre</strong></h4>
<p>Soybeans generate a measly 60 gallons of <a href="http://gas2.org/2008/04/10/biodiesel-mythbuster-20-twenty-two-biodiesel-myths-dispelled/">biodiesel</a> annually from an acre of land and has an <a href="http://www.answers.com/topic/energy-balance">energy balance</a> of 2.5.  Corn generates about 300-400 gallons of <a href="http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/ngm/2007-10/biofuels/biofuels-p6.html">ethanol per acre</a> and has an energy balance of 1.3.   Sugar cane can generate 600-800 gallons of ethanol per acre annually and has an energy <a href="http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/news/story?id=53265">balance of 8</a>.  Sugar cane unfortunately is very labor intensive to cultivate and could <a href="http://press.nationalgeographic.com/pressroom/index.jsp?pageID=pressReleases_detail&#38;siteID=1&#38;cid=1190232748874">contribute to deforestation</a>.</p>
<p>Agave however can yield an impressive 2,000 gallons of distilled ethanol per acre each year annually.  <a href="http://gas2.org/2008/04/02/worlds-first-commercially-viable-cellulosic-ethanol-plant-online-2009/">Cellulosic ethanol</a> from agave has 6 to 9 times the yield per acre.  This would significantly reduce the quantity of land needed to produce the same quantity of transportations fuels.
<p><a href="http://cleantechnica.com/2008/08/08/drink-it-or-drive-it-the-promise-of-agave-for-ethanol/" class="more-link">Read more of this story &#187;</a></p>
]]></description>
    <wfw:commentRss>http://cleantechnica.com/2008/08/08/drink-it-or-drive-it-the-promise-of-agave-for-ethanol/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
  </item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- 154 queries in 0.407 seconds. -->