E85 Boondoggle Of The Day: What's Good For Ethanol Is Good For GM Is Good For America

Edward Niedermeyer
by Edward Niedermeyer

This time the bearer of good news is retired General Wesley Clark and his “ Growth Energy” K-Street advocacy group. The special K says increasing the ethanol blend limit to E15 could create 136,101 new jobs and inject $24.4b into the US economy annually. How? According to the firm’s appalling report, bumping the federal blending mandate to E15 would double the “demand” for ethanol. As the report notes, in the mother of all Freudian slips “6 bgy of production capacity would be required to produce 20.4 bgy of ethanol (including current reserve capacity). This level of expansion could be met by the construction and operations of 60 100 bgy corn ethanol plants (emphasis added).” Of course they meant 60 100 mgy plants, but numbers have just become so darn confusing since billion became the new million.

The logic of bailout nation pervades the entire report, which is presented entirerly in terms of “economic impact.” Using data from their clients and government Regional Industrial Multipliers, they throw direct and secondary economic impacts into battle for King Corn.

The upshot? 136,101 new jobs and $24.4 billion “injected” into the US economy annually. They say. Oh, and if you like that, ask us about our all-new E20 blend. Or perhaps E30 for double the economic benefits?

The glaring omission from the report: any mention of how doubling ethanol production will actually happen. They just wrote the EPA and asked for a waiver ( PDF). But the answer is clear. Having hit the blend wall on its much-beloved “blenders credit,” the ethanol industry is out of growth room. Since real demand has nothing to do with subsidy programs, Growth Energy simply wants the EPA to “allow” their specific ethanol-blending clients to blend E15. Oh yeah, and cash in on the 51 cents per gallon of ethanol blended money shower.

Ethanol blenders already received $3b in 2007 from the blenders credit alone, an amount that dwarfs all other renewable fuel subsidies. Expanding blending mandates (volume, not percent ethanol) will push that number upwards anyway, rising from 7b gallons in 2007 to 9b in 2008, and peaking at 11b gallons in 2011.

If allowing E15 at the current “blend wall” would bump production to about double current levels, by 2011 things will be out of control. And don’t forget that the Renewable Fuels Association has already called for an ethanol bailout of $1b in short-term credit and $50b in long-term loan guarantees.

Green Car Congress notes that Ford and GM are standing by their corn, proving that ethanol is yet another underwater chunk of the auto bailout iceberg (see also: dealers, captive finance, suppliers). GM’s Beth Lowery notes that “GM has been, and continues to be, one of the strongest advocates for ethanol use.”

Because friends with K-Street teams are the best kind of friend in the world.

Edward Niedermeyer
Edward Niedermeyer

More by Edward Niedermeyer

Comments
Join the conversation
2 of 6 comments
  • Fallout11 Fallout11 on Mar 10, 2009

    Ethanol from corn remains a net energy sink, contains 30% less energy per unit mass than gasoline, and has always cost more on spot price markets despite 30 years of subsidies. Chemist Robert Rapier does a pretty good (and objective) job of analyzing the situation here: http://i-r-squared.blogspot.com/search?q=ethanol&x=0&y=0 Finally, you're still putting productive farmland to use to grow agricultural products which will then be burned in your gas tank. When explained that way (i.e. "we put food in the gastank") even most children readily judge it a poor plan.

  • R H R H on Mar 10, 2009

    I am all for this -- assuming that every time parts fail in my sportsbike or sports car prematurely due to increased ethanol content, General Wesley Clark will replace them personally & free of charge.

  • 1995 SC If the necessary number of employees vote to unionize then yes, they should be unionized. That's how it works.
  • Sobhuza Trooper That Dave Thomas fella sounds like the kind of twit who is oh-so-quick to tell us how easy and fun the bus is for any and all of your personal transportation needs. The time to get to and from the bus stop is never a concern. The time waiting for the bus is never a concern. The time waiting for a connection (if there is one) is never a concern. The weather is never a concern. Whatever you might be carrying or intend to purchase is never a concern. Nope, Boo Cars! Yeah Buses! Buses rule!Needless to say, these twits don't actual take the damn bus.
  • MaintenanceCosts Nobody here seems to acknowledge that there are multiple use cases for cars.Some people spend all their time driving all over the country and need every mile and minute of time savings. ICE cars are better for them right now.Some people only drive locally and fly when they travel. For them, there's probably a range number that works, and they don't really need more. For the uses for which we use our EV, that would be around 150 miles. The other thing about a low range requirement is it can make 120V charging viable. If you don't drive more than an average of about 40 miles/day, you can probably get enough electrons through a wall outlet. We spent over two years charging our Bolt only through 120V, while our house was getting rebuilt, and never had an issue.Those are extremes. There are all sorts of use cases in between, which probably represent the majority of drivers. For some users, what's needed is more range. But I think for most users, what's needed is better charging. Retrofit apartment garages like Tim's with 240V outlets at every spot. Install more L3 chargers in supermarket parking lots and alongside gas stations. Make chargers that work like Tesla Superchargers as ubiquitous as gas stations, and EV charging will not be an issue for most users.
  • MaintenanceCosts I don't have an opinion on whether any one plant unionizing is the right answer, but the employees sure need to have the right to organize. Unions or the credible threat of unionization are the only thing, history has proven, that can keep employers honest. Without it, we've seen over and over, the employers have complete power over the workers and feel free to exploit the workers however they see fit. (And don't tell me "oh, the workers can just leave" - in an oligopolistic industry, working conditions quickly converge, and there's not another employer right around the corner.)
  • Kjhkjlhkjhkljh kljhjkhjklhkjh [h3]Wake me up when it is a 1989 635Csi with a M88/3[/h3]
Next