Each quarter, the Renewable Fuels Association works with a national polling firm to survey registered voters about their attitudes toward ethanol, policies like the Renewable Fuel Standard, and even proposed legislation like the Next Generation Fuels Act, the Nationwide Consumer and Fuel Retailer Choice Act and the Flex Fuel Fairness Act. Over the past decade, these polls have consistently shown that the majority of Americans support ethanol and believe our nation should do more to expand the production and use of renewable fuels. Our surveys have generally shown that at least three out of five voters support ethanol and policies like the RFS, while only one in five oppose them. The other roughly 20% of voters don’t have an opinion or aren’t sure.The polling results also routinely show that ethanol has bipartisan appeal—something that is increasingly rare in an era of extreme political division.With the November election just around the corner, we asked more than 1,800 registered voters a new question in our September polling. We wanted to know how important certain energy policies were to them as they thought about the election and what candidates would get their vote: “With the 2024 general election just two months away, energy policy issues are gaining more attention from presidential and congressional candidates. Based on your perspective, how important are the following energy policy issues to you as you decide how to cast your vote for candidates in the November election?”We then provided four options for them to consider: 1) boosting America’s energy supply with increased fossil fuel production; 2) limiting fossil fuels and boosting clean energy to combat climate change; 3) adopting a balanced “all the above” approach to U.S. energy production, including both renewable energy and fossil fuels and; 4) protecting the American consumer’s ability to choose the type of vehicle and fuel that works best for their values and budget.The last two options were the most popular choices among those polled; 79% believed that protecting consumer fuel and vehicle choices was either very or somewhat important to them, and 70% felt the same about an “all of the above” approach. The least popular policy option across the entire sample was limiting fossil fuel production and boosting clean energy.Diving deeper into the demographics, it was interesting to note that about the same share—80%—of Democrats and Republicans said energy policies that protect consumer choice are important to them. Meanwhile, the demographic data also reveals that the ethanol attributes most important to voters vary somewhat by party affiliation. Most attractive to Republicans is ethanol’s affordability and the fact that it is made in America. For Democrats, ethanol’s carbon footprint was most important, followed by its efficiency and affordability.Perhaps the most eye-opening numbers from the latest polling showed that more than one-in-five registered voters still don’t know about, or have an opinion about, ethanol and the policies that support our industry. That means we still have work to do to educate American consumers about the many economic and environmental benefits of renewable fuels.But overall, these are good numbers for the ethanol industry. No matter how you slice-and-dice the stats, they speak well for ethanol, because it is an American-made, low-carbon liquid fuel that fits neatly within each of these four categories. Even if voters are not as familiar with ethanol as we may like, they see its value—whether they vote as Republicans or as Democrats.Author: Geoff Cooper&nbsp;&nbsp; President and CEO&nbsp;&nbsp; Renewable Fuels Association

2024-10-04 - Voters See Ethanol Value, Across Party Lines (Ethanol Producer Magazine)

small_Geoff-Cooper.jpg

thumbnail_Geoff-Cooper.jpg

Geoff-Cooper.jpg

Over the past decade, polls have consistently shown that the majority of Americans support ethanol and believe our nation should do more to expand the production and use of renewable fuels.

Voters See Ethanol Value, Across Party Lines

After covering ethanol production for two decades, there’s a certain depth of knowledge retained about the plants, the people who run them, and the products they make. You tend to know who’s who, which plants produce what—at what volumes and with who’s technology. You can rattle off the names of facilities that sell wet distillers grains, for example, or high-protein coproduct. You know the specific LLCs of the plants and their parent companies—and even their startup years and original nameplate capacities.All that’s expected of longtime industry reporters. You pick stuff up. But one thing that’s always sort of alluded me is knowing precisely what ethanol plants capture their fermentation CO2 for merchant use, which seems especially relevant today with more than half the plants in the nation capturing their CO2 or actively planning to.The era of carbon capture and sequestration (CCS)—utilization aide—now involves over 80 U.S. ethanol plants, most waiting to join one large, interstate aggregation effort—the Summit Carbon Solutions pipeline—but many others intent on doing CCS alone, onsite or close to their plant. Our team at Ethanol Producer Magazine decided that today’s surging CCS movement doesn’t make our industry’s legacy fleet of merchant CO2 suppliers less important to track and report on, but more. The CCUS fleet includes them. So we set out this fall to track down data on every ethanol plant we know of doing some form of carbon capture for merchant use, enhanced oil recovery, sequestration and transformation.We ended up with a list of 120 plants—60% of the total fleet—that are, or intend to be, engaged in some form of CCUS. The list is a work in progress and, for now, is only being shared with ethanol producers requesting it, but what it ultimately shows is an industry that could soon be capturing over 22 million metric tons of CO2 annually, for all the purposes already stated. We have identified nearly 70 plants that are ready and waiting to do “Long, Aggregate, Interstate” CCS (via pipeline); more than a dozen planning to do “Onsite, Nearby, In-State” CCS—three already doing it; two doing EOR; two readying to transform their CO2 into fuels or chemicals; and 40 capturing for merchant use (a handful of which may be converting to CCS soon). It’s the start of a fascinating data project that is partially revealed in “The CO2 Report,” on page 14.Our CO2 thread continues in “Capturing What’s Out There,” on page 20, a story that hardly mentions ethanol but manages to allude to our industry’s historic CCS opportunity at every turn. At a time when it seems like regulatory red tape is holding back CCS pipelines every bit as much as opposition groups and reluctant landowners, this story reminds us that the government wants CCS to happen, having invested $1.5 billion over the last four years alone in projects related to carbon capture, use, transport, storage and removal.Indeed, all signs right now point to CCUS being a broadly supported, unstoppable movement, not only in ethanol production, but all around it.&nbsp;Enjoy the read.Author: Tom Bryan&nbsp; President &amp; Editor

2024-10-04 - All We Can Capture (Ethanol Producer Magazine)

small_Bryan-Tom-2016-MAIN.jpg

thumbnail_Bryan-Tom-2016-MAIN.jpg

Bryan-Tom-2016-MAIN.jpg

Research conducted by Ethanol Producer Magazine shows that the majority of U.S. ethanol plants are, or intend to be, engaged in some sort of CCUS, including capture for merchant use, enhanced oil recovery, sequestration or transformation.  

All We Can Capture

With the acceleration of decarbonization efforts, the aviation sector is seeking solutions like sustainable aviation fuel (SAF) to decrease greenhouse gas emissions. The U.S. Grains Council is responding by ramping up efforts and engagement within the global aviation community to advocate for U.S. industry access.Total jet fuel demand, including SAF, is at 101 billion gallons and is expected to reach 136 billion gallons by 2035. SAF is estimated to displace 9% of worldwide jet fuel demand by 2035, or around 13 billion gallons.Within this significant expansion of demand, alcohol-to-jet is projected to become the second most predominant production pathway internationally, driven by a surge in investments and building of ATJ facilities that is supported by the SAF policy targets set and by complimentary international airlines and airport commitments.This demand for ethanol as a feedstock for ATJ is aligned to become an alternative and growing demand source to support farmer income in the coming years. The Council’s estimates predict that stable area and trendline corn yield could increase corn production by about 1.4 billion bushels. This additional corn production would translate to nearly four billion gallons of additional ethanol supply to provide for the global ATJ market.To supply international markets, U.S. ethanol is well positioned in terms of cost and carbon intensity score depending on the model used. Additionally, CI value can be further lowered using climate-smart agriculture and renewable energy sources. Demand for this low-CI ethanol is the primary driver to keep corn acres stable and sustain farm income in the U.S.One of the most widely recognized and impactful low-CI pathways is carbon capture and storage technology coupled with renewable energy inputs at the ethanol and ATJ production site. Driven by IRA credits and industry investments, U.S. ethanol production capacity via CCS is expected to be nearly 9 billion gallons per year by 2030, a well-regarded talking point within international SAF consumers.Global SAF consumption growth creates demand for more feedstocks. A recent Council study found the required feedstock and cropland to satisfy future SAF demand is more easily met by U.S. corn than soybean production. Incremental, anticipated domestic SAF production would need 14.6 million acres of soybeans or 3.4 million acres of corn. This is primarily due to SAF yield from corn, estimated at 4.4 times the SAF yield from soybeans.With robust yield growth and stable corn acres in the U.S., domestic ethanol supply could increase significantly. This would create opportunities for global SAF and fuel exports.While there is opportunity, the Council is cognizant of varying global and international models related to corn ethanol’s ATJ competitiveness and default scoring. A main example is that the International Civil Aviation Organization’s CORSIA model does not recognize CCS or climate smart agriculture. This creates major roadblocks for domestic and international prospective producers and consumers, disincentivizing the adoption of U.S. corn ethanol-based SAF.The Council is collaborating within a multistakeholder approach to strengthen our advocacy efforts within CORSIA modeling to suit the needs of current regions and production pathways, thereby empowering nations to make meaningful progress toward a decarbonized aviation future.Author: Mackenzie Boubin&nbsp;&nbsp; U.S. Grains Council Director of Global Ethanol Export Development

2024-10-04 - The Importance of U.S. Ethanol Engagement within A Competitive Global SAF Market (Ethanol Producer Magazine)

small_Mackenzie-Boubin.jpg

thumbnail_Mackenzie-Boubin.jpg

Mackenzie-Boubin.jpg

The aviation sector is seeking solutions like SAF to decrease GHG emissions. The USGC is responding by ramping up efforts and engagement within the global aviation community to advocate for U.S. industry access.

The Importance of U.S. Ethanol Engagement within A Competitive Global SAF Market

2024-10-04 - The CO2 Report (Ethanol Producer Magazine)

small_Feat2-PurProduct_NovEPM24.jpg

thumbnail_Feat2-PurProduct_NovEPM24.jpg

Feat2-PurProduct_NovEPM24.jpg

small_Feat3-CarbonLedeNovEPM24.jpg

thumbnail_Feat3-CarbonLedeNovEPM24.jpg

Feat3-CarbonLedeNovEPM24.jpg

small_Section-FrontNovEPM24.jpg

thumbnail_Section-FrontNovEPM24.jpg

Section-FrontNovEPM24.jpg

small_RedTrailEnergy-NovEPM24.jpg

thumbnail_RedTrailEnergy-NovEPM24.jpg

RedTrailEnergy-NovEPM24.jpg

small_HYCO1systemNovEPM24.jpg

thumbnail_HYCO1systemNovEPM24.jpg

HYCO1systemNovEPM24.jpg

EPM has collected information on 120 U.S. ethanol plants that are capturing their fermentation carbon dioxide—or intend to—for one of three principal purposes: conventional utilization, sequestration or next-gen transformation.

The CO2 Report

Access to higher-level ethanol blends at gas stations across the country is expanding thanks to federally funded infrastructure incentive programs along with state-based opportunities. In 2022, the USDA announced plans to provide $50 million in funding to transportation fueling and distribution facilities in an effort to lower the out-of-pocket costs retailers bear when installing and upgrading biofuel related pumps, dispensers and storage tanks. Since 2022, the amount of funding through the Higher Blends Infrastructure Incentive Program, or HBIIP, has increased significantly to $450 million in available grant funding.The grants can cover up to 75 percent (capped at $5 million) of total project costs to help facilities convert to higher-blend fuels, according to the USDA. The fuels must also be greater than 10 percent for ethanol and 5% for biodiesel. The most recent round of funding totaled $90.3 million and helped 89 projects across 26 states. The grant money has made a difference in multiple ways in several states despite the U.S. EPA’s continued inaction on the long-term, permanent policy decision to allow for year-round E15 blends.In April this year, the EPA once again issued an emergency waiver for E15 to be sold during the summer months. In two-thirds of the country, E15 can’t be sold at retail stations from June 1 through September 15. Certain states, including Illinois, Iowa, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, Ohio, South Dakota and Wisconsin, will be able to sell E15 year-round starting in 2025 due to a regulatory opt-out they participated in. Ethanol advocacy groups like the American Coalition for Ethanol continue to push policy makers to determine a permanent solution for year-round E15. Until then, the HBIIP program appears to be a bright spot in the higher-level ethanol blends story taking place from coast to coast.Grant Money To California, Retailers In Other States&nbsp; Of all the states receiving funding through HBIIP, California is by far the biggest recipient with 21 separate entities receiving grant money. The lowest grant awards went to three separate entities, each getting $29,125. White DJY Inc., for example, the owner of less than 10 fueling stations, is using the money to install one E85 dispenser and one ethanol fuel storage tank. The grant money, for that small project alone, is expected to increase the amount of ethanol sold by 92,630 gallons per year.Power Petroleum Corp, another owner of 10 or fewer fueling stations, will use $29,125 in grant funding to install one E85 dispenser, boosting ethanol sales by an estimated 25,976 gallons there.On the opposite end of the funding spectrum in California are grant recipients like Satnam Petroleum. It has received $1.2 million-plus in funding. Satnam may not own many fueling stations (10 or less) but the retailer is installing 11 E85 dispensers, two ethanol storage tanks, four B20 biodiesel dispensers and two biodiesel storage tanks, all to help increase biofuel usage by 237,695 gallons per year.No grant recipient will help increase the use of higher-blend ethanol quite like New Leaf Biofuel LLC. The California company will use $632,500 in funding to increase ethanol sold in the state by 7 million gallons per year through the installation of a new E85 header/rack, pump, piping and loadout at one of its facilities.Overall, the HBIIP grants to California entities will increase ethanol sold in the state by roughly 9.2 million gallons per year. An additional 44 E85 pumps will be added, along with an additional 10 ethanol storage tanks, either new installations or replacements.In Iowa, where nine HBIIP grants are landing, the largest grant recipient will use $510,500 in funding to replace four E15 dispensers and four ethanol storage tanks at three fueling stations. Kimmes Enterprises LLC expects the changes to increase the amount of ethanol it sells per year by 634,737 gallons.Combined with California’s 21 projects, the HBIIP grants in Iowa and the Golden State alone will add roughly 50.8 million gallons of ethanol or biofuels sold per year. Additional states receiving grants to add higher-blend infrastructure capabilities include Georgia (1), Colorado (1), Missouri (3), Illinois (1), Minnesota (18), North Dakota (2), Nebraska (1), New Hampshire (1), Rhode Island (1), New York (2), South Dakota (1), Washington (2) and Wisconsin (1).The Impact of HBIIP&nbsp; Growth Energy, a leading voice of the U.S. biofuels industry, was responsible for helping write many of the applications to the program for fuel retailers servicing more than 300 stores.“As consumer demand for higher blends like E15 continues to soar, our market development team is proud to have supported more than half of all HBIIP applications this round,” said Growth Energy CEO Emily Skor earlier this year.Growth energy has a market development team formed specifically to help fuel retailers.The Renewable Fuels Association has also helped with grant writing assistance and application help for many fuel retailers. RFA Director of Market Development Cassie Mullen played a big part in helping members apply for HBIIP dollars.The American Coalition for Ethanol even honored a member of the USDA staff engaged with HBIIP earlier this year at the association’s annual meeting. ACE noted the work of Jeff Carpenter, a USDA staff member of the rural development program who helped manage and promote the program.John Maynes, president of government and regulatory affairs for FUELIowa, says biofuel infrastructure is a primary link to connecting homegrown Iowa products like ethanol to consumers in the state. “Similar to the family farms that make up the fabric of rural Iowa, fuel marketing companies are multi-generation family businesses,” Maynes says. “Our number-one customers are our friends in the agriculture industry.”The HBIIP program has been a lifeline to gas station owners in Iowa, Maynes says. Although the Iowa state legislature’s E15 mandate of 2022 may be good for consumers looking to pay less at the pump, the cost to Iowa’s gas station owners has been large. According to Maynes, today’s cost to install infrastructure compatible with the sale of E15 at a site with four dispensers, three product piping lines and two tanks is quickly approaching $700,000. “This type of investment is difficult to justify for a business in today’s market,” Maynes says, “and the justification gets even more difficult for our lower-volume rural gas stations who serve as the fiber of Iowa’s rural fuel distribution network.”Iowa’s E15 mandate means penalties will be imposed on fuel stations that don’t offer E15 by 2026. Maynes says those that don’t currently offer E15 simply do not have compatible infrastructure. And, according to Iowa Department of Revenue Data, only 489 of the 1,879 retail gas stations in Iowa are currently selling E15.Maynes believes fuel retailers from other states could learn a lot from FUELIowa’s members. The HBIIP program has also created a notable investment vehicle to help retailers add compatible infrastructure.&nbsp;“The USDA HBIIP program is far and away the most successful biofuel investment vehicle to date,” he says, adding that “each investment grant directly results in new sales of high-blend biofuels to end-user customers.”Part of the HBIIP program and E15 mandate story that doesn’t always get told, however, is the cost and time associated with upgrading the fueling stations. The investment by the retailer allows the station to sell higher biofuel blends but does not always translate to more gallons of fuel sold overall. &nbsp;Combined with the interest rate trends and the downward trend in overall gallons sold, the return on investment can be hard to pencil out, he says. The other challenge is labor. The removal of existing infrastructure is intensive and disruptive to business.FUELIowa and its member companies are for supporting biofuels in Iowa despite the challenges of costs.“We’ve been successful in maintaining a per-gallon incentive for sales of E15 despite a mandate,” Maynes says. “Generally, those two policy items don’t go hand in hand. We believe an approach that pairs infrastructure investment with incentives to make biofuels more attractive for consumers addresses two critical elements” he adds, “availability and consumer acceptance.”State-Level Grants&nbsp; Federal funding isn’t the only option for fuel retailers looking to upgrade to flex-fuel options. Through the Ethanol Blender Pump Grant in South Dakota, fuel retailers could apply for $25,000 for the first pump and $10,000 for subsequent pumps. Starting in January, the state will also provide a 5-cent rebate for every gallon of E15 sold in an effort to support local agriculture and incentivize the sale of higher ethanol blends.In Missouri, fuel retailers can apply for grant amounts of up to $500,000 through the state’s Biofuel Infrastructure Incentive Program administered through the Missouri Department of Agriculture. Funding can go towards construction expenses, installations, upgrades or retrofits of fuel dispensers, storage tanks and other related equipment.Indiana, Illinois, Kansas, Minnesota and other states have also offered blender pump incentive programs in the past.The Nebraska Corn Board also has a Blender Pump Grant Program that launched in July. Fuel retailers can apply for up to $50,000 in funding. Like South Dakota, the goal of the funding is to help increase the availability of E15, E30 and E85 by supporting the development of &nbsp;infrastructure needed to provide the blends. The grant money could be used for tanks, piping, electrical work, dispensers, pumps or even signage.The reasoning behind NCB’s push for the blender pump program is similar to, if not exactly the same as the other states or federal programs offering such funding. The infrastructure funding achieves multiple objectives at once. In addition to helping fuel retailers manage the high-costs and disruption of upgrading their pump infrastructure, storage tanks or blending terminals, the funding also helps give drivers a homegrown option with a financial reward. As Payton Schaneman, director of market development for NCB says, “By increasing the availability of E15, E30 and E85, we can boost demand for [Nebraska-grown] corn while providing consumers with more choices at the pump.” &nbsp; Author: Luke Geiver&nbsp; Contact: writer@bbiinternational.com

2024-10-07 - A Hand Up for Higher Blends (Ethanol Producer Magazine)

small_iStock-1781820583NovEPM24.jpg

thumbnail_iStock-1781820583NovEPM24.jpg

iStock-1781820583NovEPM24.jpg

small_underground-tank-installationNovEPM24.jpg

thumbnail_underground-tank-installationNovEPM24.jpg

underground-tank-installationNovEPM24.jpg

small_9Z3A0135_2-scaled.jpg

thumbnail_9Z3A0135_2-scaled.jpg

9Z3A0135_2-scaled.jpg

Through federal and state funding incentives, higher ethanol blend infrastructure is going in—and ethanol gallons sold are going up.

A Hand Up for Higher Blends

Corn growers might soon be supplying more than yellow dent corn when their trucks roll over the scale and dump at the ethanol plant down the road. A carbon intensity (CI) certificate—potentially worth serious money—could be their new deliverable.Impressive 45Z tax credit incentives promise to reward ethanol producers who succeed in driving their CI below the qualifying threshold in the Inflation Reduction Act. The incentives are potentially even greater for those who figure out how to buy low-CI feedstock grown with climate-smart agriculture practices.&nbsp;Just how much that tax credit could be worth is generating some excitement in corn country. Former ISU Extension Economist Alejandro Plastina designed a Carbon Intensity Score Calculator for corn farmers based on the GREET R&amp;D model. “We don’t know what the model for the 45Z tax credit will be like,” he says, “but most think it will be an improvement, and the basic structure will be similar.” (See sidebar for more details on the calculator.)Plastina calls the ISU calculator an educational tool, giving corn growers a glimpse into low-CI corn’s value to ethanol plants, and also assisting policymakers in understanding the aggregate effect of these measures.&nbsp;There are limitations to this Version 1.0 tool. The biggest one is that the details of the final GREET model to be used, along with &nbsp;other 45Z guidance, were still unknown when the tool was released (and at press time). Another is that while it calculates potential tax credit values, the calculator doesn’t account for costs. ISU provides a separate decision tool for farmers to evaluate the cost of changing farming practices, which enables them to compare that to the potential net return when selling carbon credits, Plastina says.For ethanol plants buying corn from several hundred farmers, the question becomes: how many farmers have to be willing to adopt climate-smart practices, and with what sort of CI reductions, to make it worth doing? “That’s a great question and one we plan to address once the final model comes out,” Plastina says.“By itself, changing practices in corn production will not change the scoring of ethanol enough to make a traditional ethanol plant qualify for these tax credits,” he says. “There has to be additional investment by the plant to have a CI score below the 50 [kg of CO2 equivalent per MMBtu] threshold for the tax credits to begin.”&nbsp;The plant will want to recover that investment, he points out, with the next question being how much of the tax credit will get passed through to the farmer once the costs for record keeping and third-party certification and verification get covered. “And although an ethanol plant can measure feedstock into the system as an average carbon intensity,” he says, “it’s a big call to make on how to calculate what portion of the tax credit is due to Farmer X’s corn versus Farmer Y’s corn.”“On paper, these tax credits look like something that could be a big source of revenue for farmers,” he adds. “In reality, it will depend on how the regulations allow for keeping track of the carbon intensity of corn from different sources. That’s why I didn’t jump into the aggregate analysis. It will depend on how these contributions get measured on whether it will make sense for farmers to invest in changing practices to reduce carbon intensity or not.”Regulation Preview&nbsp; A report from another ISU department offers hints on what those 45Z regulations might look like. The Center for Agricultural Law and Taxation dug into the guidance for 40B—the sustainable aviation fuel (SAF) tax credit that gets folded into the 45Z program when it starts—to give insight into what 45Z requirements might look like. The center’s Ag Docket blog, “Unpacking the Section 45Z Clean Fuel Production Credit,” listed requirements for feedstocks supplied under the Climate Smart Agriculture pilot program for 40B, summarized below: &nbsp;• CSA farmers must meet specific and detailed record keeping for each practice. &nbsp;• Each practice must be certified by an unrelated party.&nbsp;• The farmer must have a contract with the SAF producer and the SAF producer must maintain records.• Records must demonstrate supply chain traceability.• Unrelated party certifiers must verify CSA practice and supply chain traceability.• The unrelated party certifiers must be accredited and be a certified crop advisor or USDA technical service provider.• The farmer must provide a certificate to the SAF producer supporting the farmer’s claim.• Farmers must certify that they have not and will not sell carbon credits elsewhere for the same acreage.• Farmers must attest they intend to continue the practices on the same acreage.&nbsp;Kelvin Leibold, a recently retired ISU Extension regional specialist and long-time farmer, says the deal breaker for him would be a requirement to segregate qualifying bushels in a separate bin. There’s great potential for these tax credits to reward farmers, “but I’m not sure how it’s all going to work out.”&nbsp;He hopes the farmers’ certificates will function like RINs—the renewable identification numbers assigned to each gallon of ethanol that are used to demonstrate compliance with the Renewable Fuel Standard. He hopes these certificates will be easily transferrable. “If you had an ethanol plant close to you that didn’t accept certificates and you had some, maybe you can trade them with another ethanol plant or trade with another farmer who sells to a different ethanol plant.”&nbsp;He has numerous other questions: “What’s the startup cost on all of this for the farmer and ethanol plant? How quickly can they put together the paperwork so it’s understandable? Is it a simple system?” He expects it will take quite a bit of work for an ethanol plant to calculate the value of the certificates and come up with what they are willing to pass along.Then there is the question of what happens after the program’s first three years is up, Leibold says. “How long is the funding going to last? Do these carbon credits stay out there? I’m not sure this is a flash in the pan, or something long term, but I’m not going to change my farming operation a whole lot to get this credit for just a couple of years.”&nbsp;The value of the tax credits could range from around $50 an acre up to $270 per acre—if the ethanol plant qualifies for bonus tax credits—he points out, but the question remains how much of that gets passed through to the farmer.When the final guidance comes at the end of the year, Plastina will update the calculator, he says, publishing it through his new position as the director of the Rural and Farm Finance Policy Analysis Center at the University of Missouri-Columbia. Supported by the USDA Office of the Chief Economist, RAFF provides farm income projections and other economic analyses. Plastinia hopes the updated calculator will be published in collaboration with his former colleagues at ISU Extension. He also intends to expand the calculator to include soybeans used for biodiesel and renewable diesel, and other biofuel feedstocks. Author: Susanne Retka Schill&nbsp;&nbsp; Contact: writer@bbiinternational.com

2024-10-08 - Calculating Paths to Cleaner Corn (Ethanol Producer Magazine)

small_iStock-1805849861NovEPM24.jpg

thumbnail_iStock-1805849861NovEPM24.jpg

iStock-1805849861NovEPM24.jpg

small_f4-ethanol-chemicals-NovEPM24.jpg

thumbnail_f4-ethanol-chemicals-NovEPM24.jpg

f4-ethanol-chemicals-NovEPM24.jpg

small_Alejandro-Plastina_EPM.jpg

thumbnail_Alejandro-Plastina_EPM.jpg

Alejandro-Plastina_EPM.jpg

An Iowa State University Extension tool gives a glimpse at how much climate-smart farming practices could shave off corn’s CI. 

Calculating Paths to Cleaner Corn

The American Coalition for Ethanol’s 2024 conference, themed “The Gold Standard,” featured important figures with industry impact, including representatives from Summit Carbon Solutions and the U.S. Department of Agriculture. Held in Omaha, Nebraska, this year’s general session speakers spoke on key topics weighing on the minds of U.S. ethanol producers, such as climate-smart agriculture, carbon capture and sequestration pipelines and ethanol’s inclusion in the developing SAF market.&nbsp;Dave Sovereign, chairman of the board for ACE, introduced the general session, encouraging ethanol producers to stay engaged with policymakers. “When we, as industry representatives, meet with our elected officials, they quickly pick up on the integrity, character and passion in [our] conversation, and [they] realize how our industry has benefitted their constituents,” he said. “And thereby, we earn their support, but we can’t take this support for granted. And as an industry, we must keep these lines of communication open.”Following Sovereign’s remarks, Brian Jennings, CEO of ACE, updated the assembly on the success attained “at long last” for the eight states that opted out of the federal government’s Reid vapor pressure (RVP) regulations, bypassing a rule that prevented E15 from being sold during the summer throughout much of the country. “The optouts from key Corn Belt governors combined with summertime ... emergency waivers for E15 in conventional gasoline areas—the third consecutive year EPA has invoked its emergency authority I would add—should help set the stage for coast-to-coast availability,” he said. While encouraging more states to follow the path of those that opted out of the RVP rule, he advocated for Congress to step in and make E15 available year round, nationwide without the need for an emergency waiver, sharing that ACE is optimistic about “the opportunity to get E15 legislation across the finish line before the end of the year.”&nbsp;The RFS has also been on an encouraging trajectory under this administration, Jennings said, citing fewer conflicts with refiners over annual blending obligations due to the relatively timely release of annual volume obligations and the current administration’s reluctance to approve unwarranted small refinery waivers (SREs). However, he also emphasized the need for vigilance in defending the RFS due to recent court battles with refiners and a D.C. court requiring EPA to reassess each SRE denial. He also highlighted the focus put on decarbonization and the role that low-carbon fuels could play in this national objective.In his remarks, Jennings also shared updates on the Regional Conservation Partnership Program, which incentivizes farmers to implement climate-smart practices. The program launched in 2021 when ACE was awarded funding by USDA, allowing the program to get its start in South Dakota, incentivizing the adoption of low-carbon and regenerative farming practices on 18,000 acres, according to Jennings. This year, more funding was granted, expanding the program’s reach to 10 states and 13 to 14 ethanol companies with the funding to incentivize climate-smart ag practices on an additional 100,000 acres.“The sites for this larger project were deliberately chosen to provide the Department of Energy with robust data regarding the greenhouse gas benefits of conservation practices in different soil types and climates,” Jennings said. “Already, more than 500 farmers have attended meetings we have hosted in seven of the 13 ethanol grain sheds, and those farmers have expressed interest in enrolling nearly 250,000 acres in our project, meaning initial farmer interest is approaching five times available funding.”The goal of the project is to help address the real and perceived information gaps surrounding the GHG reduction benefits of climate-smart agriculture; helping farmers get credit for standalone practices—no-till farming, for example—rather than only getting a maximum 10-point reduction credit through the bundling of three requisite practices (cover crops, no-til and enhanced efficiency fertilizer use), as this year’s 40B guidance from Treasury required. “Ultimately, we are focused on helping ethanol companies sell new and valuable products to diversify their profit potential and earn premium prices in the regulated fuel markets that are being stood up all over the globe,” he said.&nbsp;Following Jennings’ remarks, Ron Lamberty, chief marketing officer with ACE, gave an update on the Higher Blends Infrastructure Initiative Program, or HBIIP. He explained that the program was undersubscribed in its first three rounds, oversubscribed in its last round and on track to be oversubscribed for the current round as well.&nbsp;Lamberty discussed the importance of educating marketers—who, in turn, educate consumers—about ethanol and its margin benefits. “That’s been our focus when we go out to trade shows, when we go out to meet with people; it’s to talk about the fact that you can make more money selling ethanol,” he said. “And the most successful retailers you’ll find are the ones that have figured that out and are making more money.” State incentives for selling higher blends “do a world of good,” he explained, pointing out that sales are surging in Iowa, Nebraska and California. The slowdown in electric car sales is driving automaker interest in developing hybrid and flex-fuel hybrid vehicles, Lamberty explained.&nbsp;The keynote address of the general session was given by Summit Carbon Solutions CEO Lee Blank. In his remarks, he updated the assembly on the progress of the company’s carbon capture and sequestration (CCS) pipeline project. Blank did not avoid acknowledging the challenges the project has faced in the past year, starting with the initial siting permit for the injection site in North Dakota being denied by the state’s Public Service Commission in August 2023.&nbsp;“September of 2023 was a very interesting time [for] Summit Carbon Solutions,” Blank said. “It was a time when we really had to reflect on [whether we] were going to get this thing accomplished or not? And so, we doubled down on efforts, we did very hard things around our company, and what I mean by that is we reduced our company down to 40% of what we were when we got started.” The company adapted to the challenge by switching from construction mode to permitting mode. He explained that the Iowa Utilities Commission permit process has finished, and Summit has been issued an order for the permit, which will be granted to them once certain conditions are met. Things aren’t over in North Dakota; the state has taken “time to rehear our permit,” Blank said, explaining that with those hearings finished, the company is waiting on a ruling.&nbsp;An encouraging development for the project happened in Minnesota, when Minnesota’s Department of Natural Resources completed an environmental impact study (EIS) on a three-mile line of the project that crosses the Ottertail River, determining the project benign. “That is going to be used across our entire footprint as we move forward, as we work, state by state by state ... that will resonate,” Blank said. “Because if you can get a benign EIS in Minnesota, that’s saying something about the project itself, so I’m really pleased for that.”The permitting process in Iowa will need to restart with the addition of several POET and Valero facilities joining on, he explained. The “order for permit” was awarded to the “base route,” so landowner meetings will restart in Iowa for those additional laterals.&nbsp;Blank reiterated the “why” of the pipeline project as well as the importance of communicating this information to ethanol producing communities. “South America is taking our exports,” Blank said. “And it’s not going to change; they are doing a bang-up job on growing crops. We have got to internalize the usage of our corn crop, and we have a way to do that, and it starts with a pipeline, it makes all the difference in the world.”The final speaker of the general session was Tom Vilsack, Secretary of USDA. Vilsack affirmed the importance of the RCPP project, calling it “an opportunity to show the power of collaboration” through bringing land grant universities, ethanol facilities, NRCS officials and DOE officials together to enable implementation of climate-smart practices. “Understanding and appreciating that in asking farmers to take a chance and a risk in adopting climate-smart or sustainable practices that there’s a cost associated with that, and it would be difficult for farmers to take that leap without partnership,” Vilsack said.&nbsp;This project helps continue building a database that allows farmers to further take advantage of market opportunities by gathering statistically significant and localized data on the impact of climate-smart and regenerative ag practices.&nbsp;Vilsack also expressed that the project’s data helps USDA make a “more powerful case” for the importance of ethanol’s inclusion in SAF. Ethanol plays a valuable role in promoting domestic energy security and preserving small to medium-sized American farmers, thereby benefitting rural communities, according to Vilsack. “I owe, personally and in my capacity as Secretary of Agriculture, a debt of gratitude to all of you for your willingness to be part of this extraordinary industry,” he said.&nbsp;The shrinking population of rural America and reduction in small family farms are among Vilsack’s concerns. A disproportionally large number of U.S. military personnel come from small towns across America, and if those populations continue shrinking, it becomes a national security threat, he explained. Making the “right choices” to support the ethanol industry is important to the administration.“Now we come to one of the big choices, while this is a 15-billion gallon industry—important, significant—we now recognize that we’re not going to have battery-powered planes and ships, we’re not going to have hydrogen-powered planes and ships for quite some time,” Vilsack said. “And so, the world needs this industry to help it create low-carbon intensity marine and jet fuel.”40B was part of an effort to make choices that support SAF. However, Vilsack recognized that bundling climate-smart ag practices in 40B guidance was not well-liked, but called an “effort to introduce the world to the fact that agriculture can make a difference, that ethanol can make a difference[.]” Establishing that was important, according to Vilsack, and it was also important that the false science around indirect-land-use change be corrected.&nbsp;Ethanol’s inclusion in the “36-billion-gallon opportunity” that is SAF production matters for the energy transition, but it also matters because of its role in preserving the family farm, explained Vilsack. In closing, Vilsack emphasized that choices need to be made to ensure the ethanol industry’s continued access to the IRA and the continuance of small-to-mid-size family farms. “Seems to me there’s a better choice, recognizing the importance of production in agriculture and [continuing] to support that as we should, and we are. But also recognizing that there needs to be ways in which that farm family can generate more than one check, if you will, from what’s done on the farm[.]”From working with farmers to drive down corn’s GHG emissions to championing nationwide, permanent availability of E15, ACE’s focus on expanding ethanol’s reach is evident. Jennings laid it out plainly: “Our goal: to make ethanol the undisputed gold standard clean fuel of the future.” Author: Katie Schroeder&nbsp; Contact: katie.schroeder@bbiinternational.com

2024-10-07 - Going for Gold (Ethanol Producer Magazine)

small_Feat3-QALedeNovEPM24.jpg

thumbnail_Feat3-QALedeNovEPM24.jpg

Feat3-QALedeNovEPM24.jpg

small_Feat3-AgImpactNovEPM24.jpg

thumbnail_Feat3-AgImpactNovEPM24.jpg

Feat3-AgImpactNovEPM24.jpg

small_Feat3-AudienceACE2LedeNovEPM24.jpg

thumbnail_Feat3-AudienceACE2LedeNovEPM24.jpg

Feat3-AudienceACE2LedeNovEPM24.jpg

small_Feat3-PermitPersuitNovEPM24.jpg

thumbnail_Feat3-PermitPersuitNovEPM24.jpg

Feat3-PermitPersuitNovEPM24.jpg

small_Feat3-CatalyzingGrowthNovEPM24.jpg

thumbnail_Feat3-CatalyzingGrowthNovEPM24.jpg

Feat3-CatalyzingGrowthNovEPM24.jpg

Increasing the ethanol industry’s market by decreasing the biofuel’s carbon intensity score was a major theme 
at the 2024 ACE conference as key industry players spoke to the industry's challenges and opportunities. 

Going for Gold

Carbon management is experiencing exponential growth, according to the leading U.S. government agency responsible for overseeing and developing infrastructure for it. While the U.S. Department of Energy has many offices working on carbon sequestration, the Office of Fossil Energy and Carbon Management, or FECM, has invested roughly $1.47 billion over the past four years into a range of projects, spanning carbon capture, use, transport, storage and removal.FECM currently has available funding to help industrial, power generation and legacy carbon dioxide producers study the possibilities of CO2 transport to locations for geologic storage or conversion to useful products—and ethanol plants qualify. The CO2 can be transported by several means, including pipeline, rail, truck, barge or ship.FECM’s overall goal isn’t just about capturing and transporting CO2. The DOE wing consistently points out that performing such a substantial scale-up of infrastructure in the next decade will not only support the growth of the carbon management industry, but also create high-paying jobs and protect communities across the country.Funding Opportunities for CO2 Produced Via Ethanol Production&nbsp; Last year, FECM made a funding opportunity announcement (FOA 2730) of $27 million to support front-end engineering and design (FEED) studies for regional CO2 transport networks. It was the second round of funding for such projects. That $27 million outlay was part of a larger opportunity with $100 million allocated from the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law to help kickstart CO2 transport projects. While some of that funding has been awarded, FECM has reopened its funding opportunities again for another round. In May, another $24 million funding round was announced.&nbsp;“To date, the current number of projects selected and associated funding under the FOA 2730 falls below that threshold ($100 million), which means there is more funding that can be deployed to support future FEED studies,” a FECM spokesperson says.Seven total selections have been previously identified through FECM selection announcements, representing a range of potential industries including power generation, gas processing, refining and chemical production, FECM says, and funding will continue through 2026.During the first round of funding, three recipients were chosen. Each funding recipient received the full $3 million available from FECM. In Michigan, Carbon Solutions LLC was awarded for the purpose of studying a commercial-scale pipeline to transport quantities of anthropogenic CO2 through a multi-point pipeline delivering the compressed gas to multiple geologic storage locations.In Texas, Howard Midstream Energy Partners LLC was awarded funding to help study a 600-mile regional and commercial scale pipeline for moving supercritical anthropogenic CO2 from various sources to multiple CO2 sinks on the Gulf Coast.In Georgia, Southern States Energy Board will study a pipeline system across the Houston-Galveston region to decrease the region’s CO2 emissions using a 60-mile pipeline.For the second round of FEED study funding through FOA 2730, FECM awarded four recipients.BKV dCarbon High West LLC out of Denver, was awarded roughly $2.5 million to look at a CO2 barge operation for the Gulf Coast of Louisiana, Mississippi and Alabama.Carbon Solutions LLC (also a recipient through the first round of funding) was awarded $3 million to study an open-access, 488-mile CO2 pipeline to transport up to 32 million metric tons of CO2 per year across Montana, North Dakota and Wyoming.In Florida, Overseas Shipholding Group Inc. got $2.5 million to study a CO2 transport system based on an articulated tug and barge operation from a proposed multimodal hub at Port Tampa Bay to an existing tank terminal near Sunshine, Louisianna.And the last recipient of the second round of funding was ZuCO2 Transport LLC out of California. The company will study a West Coast barge CO2 project that would take CO2 from Washington, Oregon and California to a storage site in the San Joaquin Delta of California.While the FECM spokesperson, citing procurement sensitivities, declined to say what, if any, insights new applicants might gain from previous awardees, the office did offer this: “Following the selections announcements, it is apparent that there is market interest in pipeline and waterborne shipping for CO2 transport,” they stated, adding that each mode of transport has a unique opportunity and potential advantage in certain circumstances to support the future large-scale deployment of CO2 transportation infrastructure.The funding can be used for studying a variety of factors, including scale, terrain, region, size, volume, power supply, CO2 capture, conversion and storage parameters. Studies should be in the range of $750,000 to $3 million and must show technical merit, commercial and regulatory viability, and strategic value to the CCUS and CDR industries, FECM says. While applicants are encouraged to propose projects with the consideration for the creation and integration into a hub-and-cluster configuration, an applicant can offer a different approach.“The funding opportunity has now matured to be inclusive of all modes of transport and supporting interconnections, and we would like to encourage applicants to take advantage of that inclusivity,” the spokesperson says.Applicants for funding must also address other impacts of CO2 infrastructure development and operation, including community engagement. In a 2023 EPM interview with Brad Crabtree, assistant secretary at FECM, about carbon management and its place in ethanol, he was quick to point out the need for infrastructure plans to address the community aspect.In its recently released, “Heartland Regional Report: Building A Clean and Industrial Economy and the Supporting Role of the U.S. DOE’s Office of Fossil Energy and Carbon Management,” FECM explained an issue it has seen with CO2 transport pipelines proposed to move ethanol-based CO2.Although leading ethanol producers see the potential and need for CO2 pipeline infrastructure, there are mixed views amongst landowners, the report said. “National advocacy organizations that oppose both ethanol as an alternative fuel and the carbon capture and storage industry have aligned themselves with local landowners who are strongly opposed to the use of eminent domain to secure the land rights needed for pipeline construction,” the report noted. Because of that, developers need to consider alternative methods to eminent domain while continuing to negotiate purchases or leases.Other concerns with CO2 infrastructure linked to ethanol production include pipeline safety, as many rural communities believe they might not be well equipped to handle an issue should it arise. FECM advocates for education, training and engagement on all fronts of the pipeline story.In its FEED study funding requirements, applicants must include a community benefits plan. The plan should include: a quality of jobs plan, a community, labor and stakeholder engagement plan development proposal and more. In 2023, Crabtree said that many landowners don’t understand carbon or related infrastructure. And, he said, projects won’t be accepted without local support.Attainable Funding Opportunities&nbsp; The policy framework for carbon management has advanced significantly in the past few years and FECM sees a future with major operating facilities and clear benefits to both industry and communities. In 2021, the passage of the BIL expanded the DOE’s budget for carbon management from less than $500 million per year to more than $12 billion spread out between 2022 and 2026.“With this expansion, the DOE’s activities shifted from primarily research, development and small-scale demonstrations to include large-scale pilots, demonstrations and deployments,” the spokesperson says. The reformation of the 45Q tax credit, which offers incentives for carbon management activities, in conjunction with the current market environment for carbon, puts FECM carbon management funding at the center of transformational industrial change.Just look at CO2 pipelines. The DOE says there are roughly 5,000 miles of CO2 pipelines across the U.S. with projections of significant scale up of transport capacity demand. In the long-term (i.e., by 2050), DOE believes more than 13,000 miles of CO2 transport trunk lines and over 52,000 miles of spur pipelines will be required to service and store 1 billion metric tons of CO2 per year. And, in the near-term, “development of that infrastructure must begin within this decade.In addition to funding studies, FECM and its parent entity, the DOE, have invested an average of $400 million a year since 2021. For the development of technologies used to capture CO2 directly from a source or from the air, funding of $54.4 million has been made available.For help with carbon storage, the DOE has provided $574 million to 49 projects as part of its Carbon Storage Assurance Facility Enterprise (CarbonSAFE) initiative.And through its Carbon Dioxide Transportation Infrastructure Finance and Innovation (CIFIA) program, FECM has made $500 million available to projects that will expand CO2 transportation infrastructure to help reduce CO2 &nbsp;emissions.FECM isn’t just funding studies that will help bring infrastructure into existence. The office is also helping to build the demand side for CO2 as well. In mid-2023, FECM announced $100 million in funding to support states, local governments and public utilities, “in purchasing products derived from converted carbon emissions.”The goal of the funding is simple: to speed up the adoption of carbon management activities and create a market for CO2-linked products. The funding should help advance the market for sustainable alternatives in fuels, chemicals and building products. The funding provided can vary between $50,000 and $500,000, with a minimum of a 50% cost-share from awardees.According to the DOE, the grants must illustrate how incumbent products can be replaced or supplemented with alternatives derived from transformed CO2.“These grants will illustrate that more sustainable alternatives are viable and will promote the deployment of these products even after the grant ends,” DOE said in its overview of the funding.“Our goal is to help achieve FECM's mission,” an office spokesperson says, “which is focused on minimizing the environmental and climate impacts of fossil energy production and use, [as well as] key industrial processes, while working to achieve net-zero emissions across the U.S. economy.” The spokesperson adds, “As a part of that mission, we anticipate that as today’s carbon management projects transition into operational facilities, their full emissions reduction potential and broader environmental, economic and jobs benefits will become evident to industry, workers and communities across the U.S.”Author: Luke Geiver&nbsp; Contact: writer@bbiinternational.com&nbsp; &nbsp;

2024-10-07 - Capturing What’s Out There (Ethanol Producer Magazine)

small_Feat2-LedeNovEPM24.jpg

thumbnail_Feat2-LedeNovEPM24.jpg

Feat2-LedeNovEPM24.jpg

small_GETTING-THINGS-MOVING_NovEPM.jpg

thumbnail_GETTING-THINGS-MOVING_NovEPM.jpg

GETTING-THINGS-MOVING_NovEPM.jpg

small_Feat2-BargeNovEPM24.jpg

thumbnail_Feat2-BargeNovEPM24.jpg

Feat2-BargeNovEPM24.jpg

Millions in federal funding is available to help carbon dioxide producers manage their CO2 and maximize their capture. 

Capturing What’s Out There

thumbnail_Nov24-EPM-Cover.jpg

Nov24-EPM-Cover.jpg

November 2024

November 2024

Columns

Voters See Ethanol Value, Across Party Lines

All We Can Capture

The Importance of U.S. Ethanol Engagement within A Competitive Global SAF Market

Featured

The CO2 Report

A Hand Up for Higher Blends

Calculating Paths to Cleaner Corn

Going for Gold

Capturing What’s Out There

November 2024.css-7jxktu{position:absolute;bottom:0px;left:0px;right:0px;height:3px;border-radius:3px;background-color:var(--chakra-colors-brandBlack);}

Columns

Voters See Ethanol Value, Across Party Lines

All We Can Capture

The Importance of U.S. Ethanol Engagement within A Competitive Global SAF Market

Featured

The CO2 Report

A Hand Up for Higher Blends

Calculating Paths to Cleaner Corn

Going for Gold

Capturing What’s Out There

November 2024