In what he describes as misplaced behavior, Nikola Davidson, program director for the Northwest Biofuels Association, has raised a good point in a Seattle Weekly article — why is it that biofuels are becoming the ire of green activists while petroleum appears to be getting a free pass?
The issue stems from activist and Green Party candidate for Washington governor Duff Badgley’s attempts to drive customers away from a new biofuel station in northwest Seattle. Allegedly Badgley and his group, One Earth, have been harassing customers by taking pictures of their license plates and passing out leaflets that proclaim biofuels as a “scourge on humankind.”
Biofuels certainly have a hard row to hoe in terms of reaching sustainability, and the activists have some valid concerns, but a “scourge on humanity”? Really? It’s almost laughable.
I’ve felt for a while now that biofuels are being increasingly demonized for reasons that have nothing to do with reality. Clearly biofuels will need to be managed in a way that ensures they are sustainable and economically viable, but it’s becoming apparent that the dark side of the environmental movement is misplacing their impassioned response — and certainly the establishment of Big Oil is more than happy about it.
Sure, in the not-so-distant future, improvements in batteries and energy storage will provide a way for a defined segment of society to move away from petroleum, and much further down the road hydrogen might provide a way to kick our combustion engine dependence completely.
But in the meantime we’re stuck with hundreds of millions of cars that depend on liquid fuels similar to gas and diesel — and unless we want to keep exporting billions and billions of our hard-earned dollars out of the United States to support foreign regimes that certainly don’t have our best interests in mind, we’ve got to come up with a home-grown solution.
The answer is clear: biofuels can span that gap and provide energy independence — and they can do it in a way that doesn’t affect food prices, actually costs less at the pump, and provides an environmental benefit.
The reality is that biofuels represent a clear way to quickly end our addiction on Big Oil and petroleum. As such, it dumbfounds me when the groups that should be overjoyed at the prospect of destroying our oil addiction are the same ones that appear — albeit unwittingly — to be doing Big Oil’s bidding. What gives?
Posts related to Biodiesel and Ethanol:
- Taking Algae Biofuel to the Next Level: Solazyme Gets $45 Million in Funding to Reach Commercial Scale
- American Ingenuity Leads to Biodiesel Breakthrough
- Biodiesel Alliance Requests Your Input on the Future of Biofuel Sustainability
- India Sets Aside 40% of Regional Wasteland for Jatropha Biodiesel Production
- Biodiesel Boom Spurs Theft of Nasty, Used Fry-O-Lator Grease
- Ford Promises 30% Better Mileage Using Ethanol Injection
- Changing Locomotion in Midstream: California’s Ethanol Mandate (Part 1)
- Prototype Ford Escape Plug-in Hybrid: 88 MPG on 85% Ethanol
Source: Seattle Weekly (via Biofuels Digest)
Image Credit: Propel Biodiesel Station and Shell Station from skidrd’s Flickr photostream. Image reproduced and altered under a Creative Commons license.
PDF 
hydrogen can be use in combustion engine so that we can keep being dependant on combustion engine. Future combustion engines will be more efficient than they today. I think electrical engineers want take over every thing and make it where mechanical engineers to not built engines.
hydrogen can be use in combustion engine so that we can keep being dependant on combustion engine. Future combustion engines will be more efficient than they today. I think electrical engineers want take over every thing and make it where mechanical engineers to not built engines.
Michael,
Straight hydrogen cannot be used in the hundreds of millions of existing combustion engines. The hydrogen future I was referring to is that of fuel cells.
Here’s the thing. With cellulosic on the (now very near) horizon, biofuels are a very, very good way to bridge us to the hydrogen future. Many naturally growing, non fretilizer requiring, easy to harvest sources can be used. Even trash someday. Engines and fuel tanks can be produced with almost no added cost to a new vehicle. And people who buy flex fuel vehicles can still choose to burn petroleum (why I don’t know), but they have the CHOICE every time the fill up. This is just another example of a completely uninformed somebody rallying to a false cause. The real cause of high food prices is the wretched petroleum (much from nations that do not like us) used to transport the stuff folks, don’t believe otherwise.
Here’s the thing. With cellulosic on the (now very near) horizon, biofuels are a very, very good way to bridge us to the hydrogen future. Many naturally growing, non fretilizer requiring, easy to harvest sources can be used. Even trash someday. Engines and fuel tanks can be produced with almost no added cost to a new vehicle. And people who buy flex fuel vehicles can still choose to burn petroleum (why I don’t know), but they have the CHOICE every time the fill up. This is just another example of a completely uninformed somebody rallying to a false cause. The real cause of high food prices is the wretched petroleum (much from nations that do not like us) used to transport the stuff folks, don’t believe otherwise.
Here’s the thing. With cellulosic on the (now very near) horizon, biofuels are a very, very good way to bridge us to the hydrogen future. Many naturally growing, non fretilizer requiring, easy to harvest sources can be used. Even trash someday. Engines and fuel tanks can be produced with almost no added cost to a new vehicle. And people who buy flex fuel vehicles can still choose to burn petroleum (why I don’t know), but they have the CHOICE every time the fill up. This is just another example of a completely uninformed somebody rallying to a false cause. The real cause of high food prices is the wretched petroleum (much from nations that do not like us) used to transport the stuff folks, don’t believe otherwise.
Hey Nick,
I’m a “friend” on Digg. I like the website and just wanted to say “hi”.
Thanks!
-HIB
Hey Nick,
I’m a “friend” on Digg. I like the website and just wanted to say “hi”.
Thanks!
-HIB
HIB,
Thanks! Glad to have you as a friend both here and on Digg.
Ice engine can run off hydrogen if the fuel system is modified. Mechanical engineers have built special engines that where design to run off hydrogen. to days engine can be modified the run off hydrogen but losses hp. It sure that the modifications cost a lot for the tanks and the new fuel delivery system.
Ice engine can run off hydrogen if the fuel system is modified. Mechanical engineers have built special engines that where design to run off hydrogen. to days engine can be modified the run off hydrogen but losses hp. It sure that the modifications cost a lot for the tanks and the new fuel delivery system.
Michael,
True that with a lot of modification and some way to store huge amount of hydrogen on board an existing combustion engine could run on hydrogen… but then the result is not really an EXISTING combustion engine is it?
Which Party Will Make or Break Biofuels?
Biofuel is a bright spot in our economy. Corn Belt states now have cheap fuel, expanding economies, and budget surpluses. Ethanol refineries are coming online in numerous other states: Texas, Louisiana, Florida, Arizona, Oklahoma, Georgia, New York, Pennsylvania, and California. Alternative feedstocks such as sorghum, organic waste, biomass and algae are being introduced. The State of Louisiana and Renergie are building a network of small, localized sweet sorghum ethanol plants, with a 5 to 1 return. Subsidizing biofuels creates jobs, stimulates our economy, and generates County, State, and Federal tax revenue. Money back in your pocket. Every dollar spent on biofuel subsidies results in $10 in economic stimulus. So go figure.
Merrill Lynch reports that ethanol blended into regular gasoline lowered the cost by 15% and saved 60 billion dollars this year. The new ethanol blender pumps will make a bigger impact, depending on who gets elected President. Typically, blending ethanol with gasoline is done in large quantities by oil companies or fuel distributors. Who ever does the blending gets the 51 cent per gallon tax credit. With the new onsite blender pumps, the retail gas station will get the tax credit. That changes everything. Retailers are expected to pass along most of the blending subsidy to the consumer. Thus, the various blends, E20, E30, E40, E50, E85 will be about 40 to 50 cents a gallon cheaper at the blender pumps. Cheaper than ethanol already is. The Republican Party wants to discontinue the blending subsidy and take this discount away from you. The Democrats want you to have it.
Ethanol blended at the pump will compete head-on with regular gasoline. This is why Big Oil wants the Republicans to get rid of the blending subsidy. They are threatened by the coming blender pumps. Ethanol blends might soon outsell gasoline, as is the trend in Iowa, Minnesota, Kansas and other ethanol producing states.
The Republican Party receives huge campaign contributions from Big Oil and their intermediaries. Their battle cry is drill, drill, drill, which we need to do. But drilling now will only impact fuel prices moderately, 7 to 10 years from now. And why all the fanfare about offshore drilling, when oil companies already have 6,000 oil leases they’re not using?
The Republican platform also calls for eliminating the 54 cent per gallon import tariff on foreign ethanol. What they advocate is that we should lessen our dependence on foreign oil by replacing it with a new dependence on Brazilian Ethanol. This would increase our Trade Deficit and the interest we pay on the National Debt, because we pay for imported fuels with debt instruments and Government Bonds. Importing Brazilian ethanol would not save you much. After shipping and handling costs from Brazil to the U.S., oil companies would pocket the rest. The consumer might save a penny or two at the pump, but your hidden cost would be 6% floating interest on imported fuel paid for with debt instruments.
By following the Republican plan to end the ethanol import tariff, we would trade one dependency for another, drive up the Trade Deficit and the National Debt, and pay more revolving interest on imported fuel. Instead, we need to keep stimulating domestic biofuels.
The subsidies we pay on petroleum based fuel are SIX TIMES higher than what we pay on ethanol and biodiesel, even while oil companies make record breaking multi-billion dollar profits. If the Republicans want to discontinue the biofuels subsidies, they should also discontinue the petroleum subsidies. But, instead, they fight to keep $50 Billion worth of annual petroleum subsidies intact. Republicans are clearly aligned with their benefactors – Big Oil.
The Republican plan to end affordable biofuel subsidies would disrupt a sector of our economy that is thriving and cost you 40 to 50 cents a gallon at the pump. Ending biofuel subsidies is poor judgment and NOT in our National Interest.
The Republican Deception is: Big Oil First – Not Country First.
Which Party Will Make or Break Biofuels?
Biofuel is a bright spot in our economy. Corn Belt states now have cheap fuel, expanding economies, and budget surpluses. Ethanol refineries are coming online in numerous other states: Texas, Louisiana, Florida, Arizona, Oklahoma, Georgia, New York, Pennsylvania, and California. Alternative feedstocks such as sorghum, organic waste, biomass and algae are being introduced. The State of Louisiana and Renergie are building a network of small, localized sweet sorghum ethanol plants, with a 5 to 1 return. Subsidizing biofuels creates jobs, stimulates our economy, and generates County, State, and Federal tax revenue. Money back in your pocket. Every dollar spent on biofuel subsidies results in $10 in economic stimulus. So go figure.
Merrill Lynch reports that ethanol blended into regular gasoline lowered the cost by 15% and saved 60 billion dollars this year. The new ethanol blender pumps will make a bigger impact, depending on who gets elected President. Typically, blending ethanol with gasoline is done in large quantities by oil companies or fuel distributors. Who ever does the blending gets the 51 cent per gallon tax credit. With the new onsite blender pumps, the retail gas station will get the tax credit. That changes everything. Retailers are expected to pass along most of the blending subsidy to the consumer. Thus, the various blends, E20, E30, E40, E50, E85 will be about 40 to 50 cents a gallon cheaper at the blender pumps. Cheaper than ethanol already is. The Republican Party wants to discontinue the blending subsidy and take this discount away from you. The Democrats want you to have it.
Ethanol blended at the pump will compete head-on with regular gasoline. This is why Big Oil wants the Republicans to get rid of the blending subsidy. They are threatened by the coming blender pumps. Ethanol blends might soon outsell gasoline, as is the trend in Iowa, Minnesota, Kansas and other ethanol producing states.
The Republican Party receives huge campaign contributions from Big Oil and their intermediaries. Their battle cry is drill, drill, drill, which we need to do. But drilling now will only impact fuel prices moderately, 7 to 10 years from now. And why all the fanfare about offshore drilling, when oil companies already have 6,000 oil leases they’re not using?
The Republican platform also calls for eliminating the 54 cent per gallon import tariff on foreign ethanol. What they advocate is that we should lessen our dependence on foreign oil by replacing it with a new dependence on Brazilian Ethanol. This would increase our Trade Deficit and the interest we pay on the National Debt, because we pay for imported fuels with debt instruments and Government Bonds. Importing Brazilian ethanol would not save you much. After shipping and handling costs from Brazil to the U.S., oil companies would pocket the rest. The consumer might save a penny or two at the pump, but your hidden cost would be 6% floating interest on imported fuel paid for with debt instruments.
By following the Republican plan to end the ethanol import tariff, we would trade one dependency for another, drive up the Trade Deficit and the National Debt, and pay more revolving interest on imported fuel. Instead, we need to keep stimulating domestic biofuels.
The subsidies we pay on petroleum based fuel are SIX TIMES higher than what we pay on ethanol and biodiesel, even while oil companies make record breaking multi-billion dollar profits. If the Republicans want to discontinue the biofuels subsidies, they should also discontinue the petroleum subsidies. But, instead, they fight to keep $50 Billion worth of annual petroleum subsidies intact. Republicans are clearly aligned with their benefactors – Big Oil.
The Republican plan to end affordable biofuel subsidies would disrupt a sector of our economy that is thriving and cost you 40 to 50 cents a gallon at the pump. Ending biofuel subsidies is poor judgment and NOT in our National Interest.
The Republican Deception is: Big Oil First – Not Country First.
Which Party Will Make or Break Biofuels?
Biofuel is a bright spot in our economy. Corn Belt states now have cheap fuel, expanding economies, and budget surpluses. Ethanol refineries are coming online in numerous other states: Texas, Louisiana, Florida, Arizona, Oklahoma, Georgia, New York, Pennsylvania, and California. Alternative feedstocks such as sorghum, organic waste, biomass and algae are being introduced. The State of Louisiana and Renergie are building a network of small, localized sweet sorghum ethanol plants, with a 5 to 1 return. Subsidizing biofuels creates jobs, stimulates our economy, and generates County, State, and Federal tax revenue. Money back in your pocket. Every dollar spent on biofuel subsidies results in $10 in economic stimulus. So go figure.
Merrill Lynch reports that ethanol blended into regular gasoline lowered the cost by 15% and saved 60 billion dollars this year. The new ethanol blender pumps will make a bigger impact, depending on who gets elected President. Typically, blending ethanol with gasoline is done in large quantities by oil companies or fuel distributors. Who ever does the blending gets the 51 cent per gallon tax credit. With the new onsite blender pumps, the retail gas station will get the tax credit. That changes everything. Retailers are expected to pass along most of the blending subsidy to the consumer. Thus, the various blends, E20, E30, E40, E50, E85 will be about 40 to 50 cents a gallon cheaper at the blender pumps. Cheaper than ethanol already is. The Republican Party wants to discontinue the blending subsidy and take this discount away from you. The Democrats want you to have it.
Ethanol blended at the pump will compete head-on with regular gasoline. This is why Big Oil wants the Republicans to get rid of the blending subsidy. They are threatened by the coming blender pumps. Ethanol blends might soon outsell gasoline, as is the trend in Iowa, Minnesota, Kansas and other ethanol producing states.
The Republican Party receives huge campaign contributions from Big Oil and their intermediaries. Their battle cry is drill, drill, drill, which we need to do. But drilling now will only impact fuel prices moderately, 7 to 10 years from now. And why all the fanfare about offshore drilling, when oil companies already have 6,000 oil leases they’re not using?
The Republican platform also calls for eliminating the 54 cent per gallon import tariff on foreign ethanol. What they advocate is that we should lessen our dependence on foreign oil by replacing it with a new dependence on Brazilian Ethanol. This would increase our Trade Deficit and the interest we pay on the National Debt, because we pay for imported fuels with debt instruments and Government Bonds. Importing Brazilian ethanol would not save you much. After shipping and handling costs from Brazil to the U.S., oil companies would pocket the rest. The consumer might save a penny or two at the pump, but your hidden cost would be 6% floating interest on imported fuel paid for with debt instruments.
By following the Republican plan to end the ethanol import tariff, we would trade one dependency for another, drive up the Trade Deficit and the National Debt, and pay more revolving interest on imported fuel. Instead, we need to keep stimulating domestic biofuels.
The subsidies we pay on petroleum based fuel are SIX TIMES higher than what we pay on ethanol and biodiesel, even while oil companies make record breaking multi-billion dollar profits. If the Republicans want to discontinue the biofuels subsidies, they should also discontinue the petroleum subsidies. But, instead, they fight to keep $50 Billion worth of annual petroleum subsidies intact. Republicans are clearly aligned with their benefactors – Big Oil.
The Republican plan to end affordable biofuel subsidies would disrupt a sector of our economy that is thriving and cost you 40 to 50 cents a gallon at the pump. Ending biofuel subsidies is poor judgment and NOT in our National Interest.
The Republican Deception is: Big Oil First – Not Country First.