By GinaMarie Cheeseman -- The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Departments of Agriculture and Energy held a press conference yesterday about the Obama administration’s proposal to increase research on biofuels and stimulate their commercialization. The Energy and Independence and Security Act (EISA) of 2007 mandates that 36 billion gallons of renewable fuels be produced by 2022.
EISA established the National Renewable Fuel Standard program (RFS). The Obama administration’s proposal would change the RFS program by establishing four categories of biofuels: cellulosic, biomass-based, advanced, and total renewable fuel.
By 2022, the proposal would require 16 billion gallons of cellulosic biofuels, 15 billion gallons annually of conventional biofuels, four billion gallons of advanced biofuels, and one billion gallons of biomass-based diesel.
“As we work towards energy independence, using more homegrown biofuels reduces our vulnerability to oil price spikes that everyone feels at the pump,” EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson said. “Energy independence also puts billions of dollars back into our economy, creates green jobs, and protects the planet from climate change in the bargain.”
“The Obama administration is sending a strong message to the industry that the federal government is committed to biofuels,” said Brent Erickson, executive vice president of the Biotechnology Industry Organization’s (BIO).
Erickson said, “This working group can better coordinate programs and help to stimulate the new investment needed to improve current biofuels production and rapidly commercialize advanced biofuels.”
Increasing the amount of renewable fuels available will reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by an average of 160 million tons a year in 2022 when the full amount mandated is in production.
A recent study by Sandia National Laboratories and General Motors found that plant and forestry waste plus energy crops could sustainably replace almost a third of gasoline use by 2030. The study assumed that 75 billions gallons of renewable energy would come from nonfood cellulosic feedstocks and 15 billion gallons from corn-based ethanol.
According to the study, 21 billion gallons of cellulosic ethanol could be produced a year by 2022 without displacing crops. Ongoing support for research and development and a stimulus for commercialization of renewable fuels is critical.
rate
email
print
link to this page
Comments: 18
I have a hard time believing that algae ethanol production would cost more than drilling for limited oil deposits on the continental shelves.
Biomass can be used in the production of agrichar (which Sam also writes about), one of the bi-products of which is hydrogen, which could be used in the production of electricity.
There are so many options (alternatives) to oil and coal.
If we do not start soon to stop the global warming effect we are helping to create we may as well do nothing at all because soon now it will not matter and we will not be able to reverse the environmental effect we are having on our environment.
True - but.... Ethanol does not add CO2 to the atmosphere, since it is produced from plants that have taken carbon out of the atmosphere. So burning ethanol is "a wash". However, your main point is true. There are better ways to fuel transportation and heat/AC. And it would be far better to try drawing down CO2 concentrations.
That can and is being done today.
We need to get off the gas and diesel powered vehicles and onto electronic powered vehicles.
And for those electric power stations get off coal and use more wind, solar, geothermal, wind or even natural gas, etc.
First Solar Passes $1 Per Watt Industry Milestone
First Solar Produces 1 Gigawatt of Clean Solar Electricity
Ford is announcing a $550 million investment in transforming a MI manufacturing plant to produce an electric Ford Escape. These things may not be as far in the future as we are often led to believe.
FORD INVESTS $550 MILLION TO BUILD GLOBAL SMALL CARS, ELECTRIC VEHICLE AT MICHIGAN PLANT
Evergreen Solar
I don't have anything against electric cars but we need to tackle the major problem of where the pollution is coming from and that is the coal and oil burning generating plants as well as the big problem of dumping chemical fertilizer into our water supply.
How much will anyone benefit from having an electric car when they die from food and water poisoning? Video: Cupertino Cement Kiln
We have the technology to stop burning carbon based fuel to generate our electricity needs, we own vast public lands belonging to the public that will support wind and solar technology but we fail to start using it.
Putting our money into electric cars now is like putting the cart before the horse and as long as people are brainwashed into thinking the public and its cars are the major problem with cleaning up the environment we will never move forward.
What about the vast fleets of merchant ships spewing out their black smoke? This is another problem nobody wants to tackle because its only the working public that pollutes the environment not the corporate hacks that could care less how your children suffer from their air poisoning methods.
Obama can talk all he wants but he cannot even get his own majority party in congress to do more than look at the next lobbyist coming down the sacred hall.