KEEP YOUR FRIENDS CLOSE AND YOUR ENEMIES CLOSER

There’s a new movement afoot in the US and it goes something like this: if corn is bad, corn-based ethanol is worse.

We receive a publication here in the office called The Ethanol Monitor and Friday’s edition featured a front page story by Editor and Publisher Tom Waterman that named the top 10 enemies of ethanol. Some of the listed enemies are blogs and authors I wasn’t well acquainted with and I bet you aren’t either.

This further drives home the message that conversations are happening every hour of every day that agriculture isn’t a part of, so I’d encourage you to click through some of these links and educate yourself. It is raining out there after all.

GRIST is an environmental blog that hits number nine on the countdown and according to Waterman, if you enter “ethanol” in the search button, you will find more than 1,100 entries, not including comments, that are 100% negative. He also mentions that this blog carries a lot of weight with the environmental community and that they could easily be ranked higher than number nine.

Robert Rapier and his blog, R Squared Energy Blog, is ranked as the number five worst enemy of ethanol for time spent discrediting every positive development in the ethanol industry. He is a big fan of the indirect land use theory and according to Waterman is very influential. Also, he’s a former Conoco Phillips employee and is definitely a Big Oil fan.

An Honorable Mention went to Mark Perry whose blog, Carpe Diem, highlights other articles against ethanol like that of fellow Honorable Mention, Robert Bryce. Scroll down to June 10 and June 11 dates to get a flavor of the position he’s pushing.

And because I can’t link to the article or republish without author consent, I wanted to offer to you the entire Top Ten enemies of ethanol according to Tom Waterman.

#10: Business Week/Ed Wallace (Bloomberg)
#9: GRIST
#8: “Big Oil”
#7: Grocery Manufacturers Association
#6: David Pimentel
#5: Robert Rapier
#4: Tim Searchinger
#3: Wall Street Journal (editorial board)
#2: California Air Resources Board
#1: Time Magazine (Michael Grunwald)

Waterman also notes that the number one slot could have easily gone to “mainstream media” who publish uninformed articles and are too lazy to complete adequate research, but he was trying to be more specific.

To obtain a copy of this article, Ethanol’s Top 10 Enemies, email info@oilintel.com or call 732-222-5578.

Lindsay Mitchell
ICGA/ICMB Marketing Director

CAUTION: MEN AT WORK

The Illinois Corn home office is under construction this week. We’re trying to prepare for our June board meetings by repairing some massive pot holes in our parking lot and driveway. What that means for those of us in the office is parking a little further away and doing a bit of a hopscotch move to get into the front door of the building without stepping in drying cement.


Inside the office, we’re under construction too. In fact, there’s a host of issues and events that we’re working on! Some have short deadlines, some have been in progress for decades, but much like the men outside pouring cement, we’re dedicated and can’t wait to see these projects to completion.

It’s just that we’re going to do so with our shirts ON.

Locks and Dams

If you take a look at our website and visit the locks and dams section, we boast that this just might be the year that Illinois corn farmers finally see funding for lock and dam upgrades. What led us to that conclusion is partly that industry and the Army Corps of Engineers have come to an agreement on how to fund the upgrades AND complete them efficiency. We’ve been taking this message to Congress and have found that they are particularly receptive to groups that have their own funding streams to partner with federal dollars! But we also know that if we don’t get lock and dam funding this year, we might have to wait a few more before we push it again. So … 2010 is the year in our minds because the timing just won’t be right next year. Call your Congressman and ask that they fund lock and dam upgrades!

CornBelters

Opening day is June 1! That means that the rest of the week and Tuesday, we’ll be hard at work preparing messaging, coordinating media, assigning tickets, outfitting our suite, and doing all the other miscellaneous work that accompanies our CornBelters partnership. Please join us for opening day when our ICMB Chairman, Jim Rapp, will throw the first pitch! If this is something that interests you, you might check out our recent podcast.

Ethanol

Now that we finally have the first blender pump operating in Sullivan, IL, we can return to other ethanol issues that are close at hand. The EPA indicates that they will issue a decision on higher ethanol blends this summer and we continue to press our Illinois Delegation to co-sponsor HR 4940, the Renewable Fuels Reinvestment Act. This act would extend the Volumetric Ethanol Excise Tax Credit among other things and will help ethanol remain a valuable partner in developing rural communities, lessoning our environmental impact, and accomplishing energy security. Kuddos to the Illinois Congressman that have already co-sponsored this important bill – if your Congressman doesn’t appear here, give him or her a call today!

Social Media

We have hired several interns for the summer that will start next week working on social media projects and helping us continue to gear up our social media presence. As you’ve obviously noticed, our blog posts and content are improving daily, but we can’t wait for them to arrive, helping us populate our youtube channel with valuable information and maybe even getting more facts and data our on facebook and twitter. If you aren’t already following us on all of these important outlets, I’d encourage you to check into them!

There are a million other “projects under construction” in our office but this definitely gives you a flavor for what the Illinois Corn staff and boards are up to right now. Please notice that we can’t complete many of these projects without your help! Consider contacting your Congressman on the above issues to thank him and ask for his help on the things that matter to you. Consider partnering with us on the social media front by following us on twitter, Facebook, youtube, or the blog and forward our messaging to your friends and family.

As they say, it takes a village. And I could sure use your help as I traverse the construction area outside our door! That’s one construction project that can’t be done soon enough.

By: Lindsay Mitchell

ICGA/ICMB Marketing Director

AN EVEN TRADE?

The Renewable Fuels Association released a report yesterday regarding U.S. ethanol exports. According to the report, our ethanol exports are surging partly because the U.S. is the lowest cost producer right now and also because we have extra ethanol we can’t use within our country.

Both of these concepts might come as a shock to you so let me give a brief explanation. Ethanol produced in Iowa is currently $1 cheaper per gallon than ethanol produced in Brazil. Blending 10% ethanol from Iowa into a gallon of gasoline would be $0.11 cheaper than the same blend containing ethanol from Brazil.

I’m not shocked that U.S. farmers and ethanol producers are the most efficient in the world, but I’m sure some are.

And in regards to the second point, we do have additional gallons of ethanol that we can’t use in the U.S. right now. Since the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency will only allow a 10% of each gallon of gasoline to be ethanol, we simply don’t have any more gallons of gasoline to blend into.

But all the summaries and background information aside (you can read that here), there are a couple of take home messages from this data that I just can’t ignore.

First, I wish the world, the government, and the American consumer would notice that American corn farmers are doing EXACTLY as we said they would – they are producing more than enough corn to feed and fuel the world. Corn farmers have grown enough corn to feed all the livestock in the U.S., to export corn to other countries to feed their livestock, to fulfill the needs of all the food markets in our country, to produce all the ethanol that our entire nation can use, and now to ship our ethanol to other countries.

Why did anyone doubt us and when is someone going to notice? American corn farmers can produce corn. They can produce exponential yields using less fertilizer, fewer chemicals, and contributing to minimal soil erosion. When is someone going to stand up and give the corn farmer credit for this incredible story of production and environmental stewardship?

Secondly, and maybe more importantly, why are we shipping ethanol to other countries at the expense of our own energy security!?

To quote the RFA report, “As long as domestic ethanol usage is restricted by the regulatory limitation on 10% blends, the U.S. ethanol industry will be forced to look to the global marketplace for new demand sources. And, as a result, Americans will miss out on the opportunity for greater fuel savings and a healthier, more secure domestic energy supply.”

I admit that I obviously have a bias because I love corn farmers, I love corn, and I love ethanol. But am I the only one thinking that trading our safety, our health, and our cash for more oil overseas because of government rhetoric is crazy?

Dave Loos
ICGA/ICMB Technology & Business Development Director
(and ethanol expert!)

ETHANOL PRODUCTION DOES NOT IMPACT INCREASING NITROGEN AND PHOSPHORUS RUNOFF

Corn needs nitrogen and phosphorus in the soil to produce quality grain. For years, farmers have added these nutrients to the soil through manure applications and, more recently, directly injecting them into the soil.

However, the actual use of nitrogen and phosphorus per bushel has decreased in recent years. Corn yields are going up and nutrient applications are decreasing, allowing farmers to use 36 percent less fertilizer for their crops than they did only three decades ago.  In addition, new tillage practices are reducing soil erosion which, in turn, decreases nutrient run off. If you look at their numbers, there is less phosphorus and nitrogen per bushel of corn now than ever before.

Currently there are two projects starting in Illinois that are addressing the movement of nitrogen and phosphorus by studying tillage, application dates and amounts. These studies will be a collaborative effort between the Environmental Defense Fund, American Farmland Trust, and University of Illinois researchers.

Increased ethanol production has had no impact on phosphorus and nitrogen run off.
Recent information is now looking at “legacy phosphorus and nitrogen” – a term coined by the EPA to indicate nutrients that were washed into the streams and rivers and deposited 50 years ago and are now being moved downstream by the heavy rainfall events of the last few years. It is estimated that it may take 30-50 years before this huge reservoir of sediment and nutrients will be washed out of the River system. Thus the significant reduction in applied nutrients/bushel currently is actually keeping the levels of nutrients in our water systems from being as high as they could be.

Mike Plumer
Ex Officio Director, ICGA & U of I Extension Specialist

WHAT QUALIFIES AS GLUTTONOUS PROFITS? HOW ABOUT 8,000%!

If you’re looking for a good read, I think you might have just stumbled across one.

Take a look at this article by Marc J. Rauch, Executive Vice President of The Auto Channel which claims to be the “largest independent automotive information resource.” I don’t know about that, but I do know that Mr. Rauch is in favor of calling a spade, a spade.

The article quickly chronicles the arrival of a news tip in his inbox entitled Automakers Concerns with E15, and his thoughts on the folks that wrote the article, their lack of facts, and their unbiased support of the oil industry.

He offers some great quotes. For one, “The story’s byline claims that its author is with the ‘Ethanol Transparency Project,’ a sponsored program of “The Agribusiness Council.” After perusing information about The Agribusiness Council I would say that its name is as ill-conceived in describing its real purpose as “National Socialism” was to describe Hitler’s Nazi Party.”

And he summarizes the article by saying, “Except for those people who make gluttonous profits from the petroleum oil, it is in everyone’s best interests to destroy OPEC and the ruling hierarchy of the gasoline companies. Energy independence from foreign dictators and terrorism supporters can be had, and there are economically viable alternatives to gasoline that are available right now. Alcohol (ethanol) is one, and it may be as close to a viable single source solution to oil as is possible.”

I won’t ruin it for you. Come check it out here.

By: Lindsay Mitchell
ICGA/ICMB Marketing Director

FAPRI Response to “Stop Big Corn” in Washington Times

Ethanol Fumes

The editorial “Stop ‘Big Corn’ ” (Opinion, Monday) did not accurately describe the analysis of ethanol policy conducted by our institute.

The editorial says we at the University of Missouri’s Food and Agricultural Policy Research Institute estimate that the ethanol blender’s tax credit increases the price of corn by “18 cents per barrel.” This appears to be a reference to a report we issued in March that looked at the impact of extending the 45-cents-per-gallon ethanol tax credit, the 54-cents-per-gallon ethanol tariff and the $1-per-gallon biodiesel credit. We estimated that the combined effect of these three policies would be to raise the average producer price of corn by 18 cents per bushel during the 2011-12 corn-marketing year. Individually, each of these policies would have a smaller impact on corn prices.

In addition, the editorial says the Environmental Protection Agency is deciding whether to “boost existing requirements that gasoline contain 10 percent ethanol to 15 percent.” The EPA is actually considering whether to allow 15 percent blends, not whether to require them.

Finally, you cite the cost of the blender’s tax credit as $16 billion per year. That would be the eventual cost of the credit if ethanol consumption reached 36 billion gallons per year and the tax credit were maintained at its current level. We project actual ethanol use in 2010 to be a little more than 12 billion gallons, suggesting that the direct fiscal cost of the credit this year will be less than $6 billion. Without legislative action, the blender’s credit will expire at the end of 2010.

PATRICK WESTHOFF
Co-director, Food and Agricultural Policy Research Institute
University of Missouri
Columbia, Mo.

Source: