SkunK Rant: Indirect Land Use

A computer modeling program used by EPA and the Department of Energy has shown that soy based biodiesel puts out 78% lower amounts of greenhouse gases than diesel fuel.

When you add on "indirect land use" it goes from 78% to a measly 22%. The reason that is important is it takes at least 50% to qualify for the tax credit that shaves $1 a gallon off the price.

So what the heck is "Indirect Land Use" SkunK?

I am afraid to tell you 'cause you'll think I'm making it up! But try to follow me here. The indirect land use argument is this:

1. US farmers plant and sell corn to make ethanol.
2. Because USA farmers plant more corn, they plant less soy beans.
3. Soy price goes up:
3a. Because USA farmers plant less soybeans.
3b. Because Soy is made into biodiesel.
4. Because the soy price goes up, Brazilian farmers plant more soy.
5. Some of the new Brazilian acerage used to be rain forest.
6. Cutting rain forest causes carbon release.

THEREFORE: Growing Corn and making soy biodiesel in the USA releases carbon in Brazil.

Now I can see a small group of tenured professors, just done grading papers, peering at the "real" world with curiosity, disgust and a bottle of Cognac, coming up with this mumbo jumbo at a dinner party. But really? Are your kidding me? Where are the adults?

The SkunK destroys the "indirect land use argument"with others DD:
1. From 2004 to 2008, while the U.S. biodiesel industry was ramping up from 25 million to 690 million gallons - Brazilian soybean production decreased .

2. Brazilian Cherry hardwood floors. If the jungle is being cleared somewhere - that is most likely the reason. It is not initially to grow soybeans. It is to poach or harvest the wood for the latest craze in American and European living room floors - Brazilian Hardwoods. Hmmm, I wonder what kind of floor they had at the professor's dinner party?

3. The price of soy - and other commodities - has gone up. That caused food companies to shift from using hydrogenated soybean oil in products like baked cookies to using palm oil, which has no transfats. That's cut demand for soybean oil by about 2.5 billion pounds.

4. House Agriculture Committee chairman Collin Peterson, D-Minn charged that corn ethanol had been singled out by its opponents for assessment of its indirect land impacts, while petroleum, which has a much larger carbon footprint, was not subject to the same scrutiny. He is not a happy camper and is no longer playing ball. http://www.feedstuffs.com/ME2/dirmod.asp?sid=F4D1A9DFCD974EAD8CD5205E15C1CB42&nm=Breaking+News&type=news&mod=News&mid=A3D60400B4204079A76C4B1B129CB433

5. DOE says the one major "indirect land use" study contains some unrealistic assumptions and obsolete data. Then they really tear it up! Another study is based on the carbon being released from CPR (conservation reserve program) land, when the DOE's own joint study shows that none of that land would needed to meet our future biofuel goals! The DOE sets up a chart to show how the assumptions in current "indirect land use" studies are wrong, one after the next. Bad assumptions make for bad science. Good Job DOE! http://www1.eere.energy.gov/biomass/pdfs/obp_science_response_web.pdf

6. This whole "indirect land use concept" in the SkunK's opinion really insults Brazil. They have a fantastic ethanol program that makes them energy independent. They control what goes on inside their borders, not the price of corn or soy. They are hardly victims of American Farmers. American Farmers have tried to emulate the Brazilian success. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/4581955.stm

This is just another attempt to try and tie some level of guilt to an American success. With the rising ethanol production over the last ten years we have seen the cleaning of the air in American Cities. When you start the day thinking every American success starts with a "victim", you end up with this kind of convoluted science.

After these new "indirect land use" studies have seen "peer review" and the light of day, the SkunK is betting the "educators" will be sent off with some more taxpayer money to do another study, while the "doers" keep us moving on the right track. We will see.

Remember, biodiesel is an energy-efficient, green fuel that gives back about three times as much energy as it takes to produce it.

tier=3&nid=2ED25D0552384C0396608AE0F548F8E9

http://sugarinds.blogspot.com/2009/05/epa-tough-on-ethanol-tougher-on.html

SkunK

PS: The SkunK wants to play too:
1. Farmers plant corn.
2. Birds eat corn.
3. Corn is used to power birds.
4. Birds were used to model manned flight.
5. Manned flight causes petro fuel to burn.
6. Burning petro fuel causes carbon release.
Therefore: Corn causes Carbon Release!

Now where is my grant money? This bottle of Cognac is almost empty!