Document Sample
SEPT Powered By Docstoc
                                          EFFICIENTLY & ECONOMICALLY!!
We cannot & must not let the oil companies take control of our emerging Bio-fuels
Industry & thereby to control the price of our food & daily needs as they do with
their fossil fuels! Driving us into economic meltdown!


 UPDATE (20) my sources: The American coalition for Ethanol, N.E.V.C (The U.S.A National Ethanol
Vehicle Coalition) Underwriters Laboratories (U.L) gasket & seal authority’s certifiers) Greenfuel Algae Bio-diesel,
Algae-Link, Bio King Inc. Bio-Diesel Reactor Manufacturing & suppliers. Also Celebrated NASA Aerospace Engineer
& President of Pioneer Astronautics research and development Robert Zubrin. Agriculture Successful
Farming Magazine, Poet energy, Alico Energy LLC. Coskata energy.

4/ 12/ 08 This Issue Features: Amazing ACE commissioned video link to the 2000 Ford TAHO & its
complete dissection after 105,486 MILES of running on Ethanol 85% compared to another with 80,000
miles on ULP! You will be amazed! See another video link, which shows a young boy & a woman installing
an FFV in a car! Then go to the online calculator of which shows not just the money we save, but all the
other benefits of using all blends of Ethanol! They said Ethanol pipelines were not possible?? Well see them
here now! Read about the Future of FFV’s! Toronto & Indiana residents now have a green Sulo bin for
green waste collection for celluloses Ethanol! Large scale Algae farming! USDA model to evaluate soil
quality from Ethanol farming! Plus much more. . . . . . . FIRST, THE AMERICAN COALITION FOR
When will Australians wake up to the fact that what they have been led to believe about Ethanol simply isn’t the
TRUTH? When will we realize that if we do not get a move on the worlds fast tracking to embrace bio-fuel will see us
having to import Ethanol & biodiesel from them while our farmers will be relegated to nothing more than suppliers
of agricultural grain & bi-products to the foreign owned oil companies?

In America, the farmers, 60% of them, are the Ethanol Industry! In larger numbers supported by their Govt. through
many Coops like ACE, they now grow, distill & in ever more numbers are even distributing Ethanol products not just
to the U.S. but as exports to the world!! The lies & the false innuendo & propaganda are fast being seen for what it is.
Oil Company initiated & all in order to keep our Aust Farmers from emulating their U.S. cousins! Now though the
truth is emerging as with the one about the so-called damage Ethanol would cause to one engine. But their truth is
far from being just that??

The American Coalition for Ethanol (ACE) has just released the following report. It commissioned a test available in a
video available at this link that is a must see & of which will blow
all its skeptics out the window!! A 2000 model Ford Taho, a 5.7ltr. V8 was donated for the test & without using a
recommended Flex Fuel Computer supposedly to allow it to run safely on all blends of fuel including ULP,
E10%, E51% E20% & E85% Ethanol It was driven around on mainly E85% Eth. I say wherever possible as
E85% Eth. Is not readily available fully across the U.S. with less than 1,800 outlets Nationwide! However when
on the odd occasion 85% was not available E10 was used! ! A similar Ford Taho was used as a comparison
which would run on ULP! After a massive 105,486 MILES (Approx 300,000 klms) the car was then dismantled
& put under the microscope? The comparison car using ULP was also dismantled at approx. 80,000 klms &
put under the same scrutiny! Though the wear in some parts of the engine like crankshaft journals &
bearings in almost all other parts like fuel pump armature as well as other internal parts showed almost
negligible wear compared to the comparison cars of which was discolored & showing signs of breaking

The spark plugs were the originals that were used & showed little wear that one would expect for 105,000
miles of wear by any ones money! The valves & seats were almost void of any signs of wear! The catalytic
converter was cut in tow & this was where one of the most amazing revelations was found? It seems this was
even showing less signs of wear than most confirming the clean burning of the cars fuel leaving little or no
residue! Thus concluding that the cars emissions were almost nonexistent! The pistons & rings again showed
little wear for miles travelled & the cylinder walls were the same!


Here the test clearly shows that the fuel lines after 105,486 miles were not brittle & showed no signs of
cracking or corroding, but that with the comparison car this was not so & the lines were showing distinct
signs of deteriation!! Finally it seems even I was not aware of just how easy it is to install a Flex Fuel
computer in almost all fuel injected cars!! & the following link:

 Which shows a woman installing one in a car that can be seen on the above link!! Though the above test was
carried out on a vehicle that was not fitted with this Flex Fuel Module it is recommended that one be fitted
allowing your engine to adjust to all blends including ULP as well as all blends of ethanol! Cost wise? The
DVD quotes under U.S.$500! But I know that they can be obtained for around U.S.$200 or even less online so
it is worth shopping around! They are installed in factory for between $100 & $200!


POSTED: OCT 23, 2008

Contact: Kristin Brekke / (605) 334-3381
"Ethanol Factor" Interactive Online Calculator Shows Ethanol's Benefits

Sioux Falls, SD (October 23, 2008) - The American Coalition for Ethanol (ACE), the nation's largest ethanol
advocacy association, today unveiled the Ethanol Factor, a new online interactive calculator which
demonstrates how choosing ethanol blends at the pump results in cleaner emissions, reduced dependence on
oil, and real savings for consumer pocketbooks. The calculator is found at

"We ought to be cleverer and creative about how we communicate the benefits of ethanol," said Brian Jennings,
Executive Vice President of ACE. "The Ethanol Factor is one of many web-based platforms ACE will be launching
to - in an entertaining, visually-appealing, and hands-on way - allow Americans to discover how much money,
how many barrels of oil, and the greenhouse gas emissions they can save by using ethanol-blended fuel." allows people to calculate the savings at the pump, emissions reduction, and oil displacement
they achieve by choosing E10, E85, or even cellulosic ethanol. Options are given to calculate results for the
individual motorist, based on type of vehicle and frequency of fuel-up, or for an entire city or country of drivers

like them. Some American Coalition for Ethanol members tried out the new calculator and shared their results.
"I always knew that ethanol saved you money, but until using the calculator I didn't realize how much money
and barrels of oil would be saved. It sure was an eye opener. Most of our stations in the Southeast currently
have 10 percent ethanol in their pumps. I can't wait until they start having E85 pumps so we can save even
more," stated Dave Howard of Track mobile, Inc. in Atlanta, Georgia. Rick Belcher also of Track mobile, Inc. in
Atlanta, Georgia added, "According to the Ethanol Factor calculator I'd save $735 a year by using E85 - that's
pretty interesting!"

"ACE's new fuel savings calculator is a great way to drive home the benefits of ethanol. In just a few minutes, I
learned that I was eliminating the need to import 20.218 barrels of foreign oil by burning E85 and my husband
was removing demand for 6.786 barrels by using an E10 blend. I did not realize just how much we were saving
by choosing ethanol. These numbers confirm that renewable fuels are making a difference to our country's
economic and national security," said Becky Frankenbach of the Missouri Corn Merchandising Council in
Jefferson City, Missouri. was built with hard data from respected sources that ACE cites as proof in the calculator. The
calculator also allows users to share their findings and "tell a friend" by emailing others the calculator results.
"Millions of people around the world satisfy their appetite for information on the Internet. In the coming weeks,
ACE will launch other 'Web 2.0' tools that enable those on the Internet to discover for themselves the value of
clean-burning and cost-effective ethanol-blended fuel," Jennings said.

For more information about ethanol, visit

The American Coalition for Ethanol (ACE) is the grassroots voice of the U.S. ethanol industry, a national
advocacy association for the ethanol industry with nearly 1,600 members nationwide, including farmers,
ethanol producers, commodity organizations, businesses supplying goods and services to the ethanol industry,
rural electric cooperatives, and individuals supportive of increased production and use of ethanol. For more
information about ethanol or ACE, visit or call (605) 334-3381.


POSTED: OCT 07, 2008
The U.S. Departments of Ag and Energy have today announced their "National Biofuels Action Plan," part
of which affirms mid-range ethanol blends as "representing a critical pathway" to reducing our nation's
dependence on fossil fuel-based gasoline and achieving the President's Twenty in Ten Initiative (20%
reduction in gasoline consumption 10 years).

In addition, the DOE's national laboratories have released a study on the successful use of mid-range
ethanol blends in vehicles and in small engines.

You cannot ship ethanol through a pipeline. Or so we’ve been told.
As the ethanol industry continues to redefine efficiency and challenge technological barriers, it shouldn’t
be a surprise that this ethanol myth has been busted. Today, shipping ethanol via pipeline is not only
possible, but a concept in the testing stages. The current question is not whether pipelines are an option
for ethanol transportation, but whether they are a viable option for this industry examining logistical
potential on all fronts. Less than five years ago, former Congressman Gil Gutknecht (R-MN) was one of
the first to explore the idea of implementing a pipeline infrastructure for ethanol. With the nation
exporting more than billion every day to import crude oil, he recognized the importance of growing
domestic ethanol production. And as U.S. ethanol production expanded, he knew that it made sense to
examine whether shipping ethanol via pipeline would be a possibility.

“There had always been interest in shipping ethanol using the same pipelines that bring gasoline to
markets, but it had always been dismissed because, regardless of what challenges there might be, the
volume just didn’t justify it,” said Ron Lamberty, Vice President / Market Development for the American
Coalition for Ethanol (ACE). “Congressman Gutknecht and others recognized that greater volume from
an RFS would change that discussion.”

The potential of an ethanol pipeline was discussed at a 2006 meeting in Sioux Falls, South Dakota with
Congressman Gutknecht, the American Coalition for Ethanol, and Mark Glaess of the Minnesota Rural
Electrics Association who brought many of the rural electric co-ops to the table. The rural electrics have
offered that, should an ethanol pipeline be constructed, they would share their rights of way, which
already exist in their extensive system of rural power lines.

The working of a pipeline

Today, petroleum pipelines efficiently transport large quantities of fuel over long distances. The layout of
the country’s pipelines reflects fuel that’s produced on either Coast, or in the Gulf Coast, and transported
to consumers in the middle of the country. The ethanol industry’s transportation needs are almost exactly
the opposite – production in the center of the country and consumers on both Coasts and in the South.
Pipelines are one-way “highways,” with fuel added on one end and removed at the opposite end, so
transporting ethanol would require one-way pipeline routes from ethanol production hubs in the
Midwest outward to its large markets.

Pipelines ship products – whether natural gas, petroleum products, or specialty products – through a
pressurized cylinder tube that links point A and point B. Pipelines are a unique transportation solution
because multiple products may be shipped at the same time, either because the batches of product do not
mix, or because they can be separated by a “pig.”

In addition to their main purpose of separating batches of liquid products in the line, pipeline pigs are
plugs that can clean and inspect the integrity of the pipeline. Instrumentation packages allow pigs to test
for dimples and imperfections by filming the inside of the pipeline, or pigs with brushes can help scrub
pipelines to rid them of product build-up. According to several petroleum companies, which spoke with
Ethanol Today, ethanol pipeline transportation faces challenges in three main areas. First, the pipeline
industry does not know the long-term impact of ethanol in pipelines, and additional research is needed to
gain conclusive materials-compatibility experience. Second, tanks and pumps may need to be added in a
variety of locations to support ethanol loading and unloading. Finally, the current one-way movement of
petroleum products through the pipeline counters the location of today’s grain-based ethanol production.
Despite the challenges, ethanol consumers and pipeline companies recognize the value in exploring a
large-scale transportation system for a growing renewable fuels industry – especially one that could
compete with the costs of rail and truck shipments.

Testing the theory

Kinder Morgan Energy Partners, L.P., which transports two million barrels of petroleum products per
day, is evaluating the potential for shipping ethanol via pipeline in response to requests from its
customers. After extensive laboratory research spanning the last 24 months, the company says that it
plans to test ethanol shipments this fall in a 16-inch pipeline linking the large fuel markets of Tampa Bay
and Orlando, Florida. With no rail service to these markets, 100 percent of their ethanol supply is
currently brought in by truck. As a result, these Florida cities are in a unique position to immediately
benefit from pipeline shipments.

Jim Lelio, Kinder Morgan’s Director of Business Development and National Biofuels Manager/Central
Florida Pipeline, said that a long checklist of items has been completed for the fall pipeline test, including
identifying and replacing any pipeline system parts – such as stainless gaskets, o-rings, and meter seals –
that may be incompatible with the ethanol. Also, pigs were used to clean the pipeline in preparation for
the introduction of ethanol and to prevent any existing residue from contaminating the new product.
Lelio said that scrubbing the pipeline is an important step in the overall cleaning process prior to
injecting ethanol batches into the line.

According to Lelio, the 104-mile stretch of pipeline was chosen for several reasons – the markets
supporting ethanol on each end, the flat terrain surrounding the pipeline, and the fact that the line
transports only gasoline today. “We have chosen this pipeline because it was the simplest,” Lelio said.
“And, if we were going to have successful ethanol shipments, it would most likely be on this pipeline.”

The company does not plan to use pigs to separate the shipments of ethanol and gasoline because it feels
that putting ethanol under pressure between gasoline batches on a relatively flat terrain will result in
very little mixture between the colliding interfaces of the two fuels. Kinder Morgan says it intends to
judge the success of the ethanol shipments sandwiched between shipments of gasoline based on product
quality, pipeline integrity, and materials compatibility criteria. If the results of the test run are positive,
commercial application of ethanol shipments through the pipeline will be pursued.

“If we can determine success, we will provide a commercial offering to the marketplace at the end of this
year, and apply the lessons learned to other systems in our pipeline network,” he said. In addition to
product pipelines, Kinder Morgan has developed a relationship with the biofuels industry. The company
delivers natural gas to numerous Midwestern ethanol plants, has invested significant capital to provide
customers ethanol storage and handling capabilities at its liquid terminal facilities, and supports a third-
party biodiesel refinery operating on one of its properties.

Looking at volumes

According to TEPPCO representative Dan Ownby, while pipeline systems function well when there is a
high volume of product to move, they are not as advantageous in terms of startup costs and flexibility.
However, he points out that since 2001, pipeline costs have remained the most consistent when compared
to rail, barge, and truck. Knowing the cost advantages, Ownby suggests examining volume. Compared to
the high volumes of petroleum products that are shipped through pipelines, ethanol volumes today are
merely a fraction. A typical batch of gasoline sent to a pipeline terminal is 25,000 barrels, or more than 1
million gallons. These batches are received around the clock, year-round. By comparison, a 50 million
gallon per year ethanol plant would produce about one batch per week. In May of last year, TEPPCO
tested the shipment of ethanol via pipeline between Indianapolis and Argo, Illinois. The 273,000 gallons
of ethanol traveled 150 miles. Extensive testing of the quality of the ethanol was performed prior to,
during, and after the shipment, and one major change was witnessed. The colorless ethanol transported
through the pipe turned a dark amber color due to heavy oxidized solid hydrocarbons, or “gum,” in the
line, which is the residue of other products being shipped through the line for 50 or more years.

In early August of this year, TEPPCO announced the opening of a terminal in Boligee, Alabama that will
handle a multitude of products, including ethanol. There, 5 million gallons of ethanol storage will help
supply the fuel needs of Birmingham and Montgomery and of eastern Mississippi until a proposed Stage
Two could increase the storage to 42 million gallons. With barge, pipe, and truck access, this ideal
location will test the role of a domestic fuel terminal in the South. Magellan and Buckeye companies are
also exploring the options of shipping ethanol via pipeline and have a proposal for a large-scale
renewable fuel pipeline system running from the Midwest to the Eastern U.S.

“The proposed system originates in Northwest Iowa and would transport as much as 300,000 barrels per
day of ethanol into distribution terminals in Ohio, Pennsylvania, Maryland, as well as New York Harbor,”
said Bruce Heine, Magellan’s Director of Government and Media Affairs.

Legislative support for ethanol pipeline transport

Because much of the nation’s pipeline infrastructure is owned by Master Limited Partnerships that can
only derive 10 percent of their income from non-qualifying assets such as ethanol, a workable ratio
among shipping products must be established. The Biofuels Pipeline Act was introduced in July 2008 to
encourage research and investment into improving the economical transport of renewable fuels to major
markets. Authored by U.S. Senators Tom Harkin (D-IA) and Richard Lugar (R-IN), the proposed
legislation would provide similar tax benefits for shipping petroleum and ethanol by identifying them as
like assets.

Petroleum companies recognize the legislation as integral for making an investment in renewable fuels
transportation. According to Bruce Heine of Magellan, resolving the tax issue related to publicly traded
companies is essential. “If this issue is not resolved, publicly traded partnerships like Magellan and
Buckeye will be unable to pursue a project of this scale,” he said. Furthermore, Heine points out that any
additional funding options would encourage companies to explore the questions posed by customers.

“We are continuing to explore our options for federal financing such as a loan guarantee,” he said.

Because the costs of constructing a pipeline can be as much as million per mile, demanding a significant
commitment from the industry, legislative support for the expansion of infrastructure can signal that
domestic ethanol production and use remain a priority for the nation. TEPPCO’s Ownby suggests that the
final logistics solution for ethanol will include all types of transportation, including pipelines. If pipeline
materials can prove compatible, the costs competitive to other forms of transport, and if the volume is
sufficient, pipelines may indeed be a possibility for ethanol.


POSTED: SEP 30, 2008

New research due out soon from the University of Nebraska-Lincoln has found that ethanol
production is more energy efficient than previously thought - in fact, two to three times more. The
research shows that 1.5 to 1.6 more units of energy are found in the ethanol than in the energy used to
produce it. In addition, 13 gallons of ethanol are produced for every 1 gallon of petroleum used in the
production lifecycle for corn-based ethanol.

Read an article here from the Grand Island, Neb. newspaper:

The full research report will be posted on as soon as it becomes available from the

Here is an example of just what U.S. Farmers are doing & what we are not!! Why?
Because the oil companies helped along by our crooked govt. don’t want this to
happen here! Therefore, our battling farmers continue to do it tuff!

The Road Ahead for FFVs (Flexible Fuel Vehicles)
From the December 2008 Issue Biomass Magazine.
Automakers are expected to produce nearly 50 2009 flexible-fuel vehicle models, doubling their offerings

from 2008. EPM examines the future of the flexible-fuel vehicle infrastructure and what each of these
companies has to offer consumers who want to use ethanol blends.
By Anna Austin Flexible-fuel vehicles (FFVs) have made a lot of headway in the past 10 years. Since 1998,
the number of FFVs on America’s roads has increased from about 171,000 to more than 6 million. When gas
prices rocketed to new heights and consumers started to see the wisdom of reducing the country’s
dependence on foreign oil, FFVs suddenly became more attractive. Automakers are gearing up to meet the
demand as consumers scramble to exchange their vehicles for more fuel-efficient, environmentally friendly
automobiles. Although miles achieved per gallon for E85 may be slightly below vehicles fueled with
regular-unleaded gasoline, the price of ethanol blends has been considerably cheaper.

In March 2006, Chrysler LLC, General Motors Corp. and Ford Motor Co. pledged to convert 50 percent of
each company’s fleet to FFVs by 2012, which is good news for consumers and the environment. According
to the National Ethanol Vehicle Coalition, there are approximately 6 million E85 compatible vehicles on
American roads today. The problem with this to date, however, is that there are less than 1,800 gas stations
nationwide that offer E85 out of a total of 161,000. According to the Renewable Fuels Association, the
majority of states host 25 or less E85 fueling stations, and five Northeast states, and Alaska and Hawaii,
don’t have any. Minnesota, Wisconsin and Iowa lead the nation with more than 100 stations each.
Phil Lampert, executive director of the NEVC, says much progress needs to be made to keep up with the
vehicle manufacturers. “Obviously, we aren’t close to the amount of E85 stations we must have to make this
move forward,” he says. “We need to continue to work on that infrastructure—there is no value to increase
flex-fuel vehicle production unless this happens.”

The NEVC is a nonprofit membership organization that serves as the nation’s primary advocacy group
promoting the use of 85 percent ethanol as an alternative transportation fuel. NEVC is composed of a wide
range of organizations, including state and local interest groups, state and local elected officials, ethanol
producers, vehicle manufacturers, agricultural interests, ethanol suppliers and others.

Lampert says vehicle manufacturers have stepped up to the plate in 2009, investing many resources toward
the design, support and distribution of FFVs. “We can’t say enough positive things about them,” he adds,
emphasizing that although incentives are clearly in sight, vehicle manufacturers have no obligations. “They
are not required to build them, they don’t receive any money from the government—but they have found
there is a demand,” Lampert says. “With the very high requirement levels in the renewable fuels standard,
everyone realizes we have to have millions of FFVs produced every year, rather than hundreds of

General Motors: Leader of the Pack
General Motors leads the pack with a total of 18 different FFVs being offered in the United States in 2009,
three more than in 2008. Models include:
Buick: *Lucerne; Cadillac: *Escalade, *Escalade ESV and *Escalade EXT; Chevrolet: Avalanche, Express,
*HHR, *HHR Panel, Impala, *Silverado, Suburban and *Tahoe; GMC: Savana, Sierra, Yukon, Yukon
XLHummer: *H2 and *H2 SUT. (* indicates FFV option new in 2009)

GM cars and trucks account for 3 million of the 6 million FFVs on U.S. roadways and the company
produced more than 1 million FFV models in North America and Brazil last year.

Addressing the release of GM’s 2009 lineup, Beth Lowery, GM vice president of environment, energy and
safety policy, says GM is on target to make 50 percent of its vehicles flexible-fuel capable by 2012,
providing the infrastructure is in place. “We continue to believe that biofuels, specifically E85, is the most
significant thing we can do in the near-term to offset future energy demands,” she says.

In May 2008, GM and Mascoma Corp. announced a strategic relationship to develop cellulosic ethanol
focused on Mascoma’s single-step biochemical conversion of nongrain biomass into low-carbon alternative
fuels to help address increasing energy demand. GM’s involvement with Mascoma will include projects to
evaluate materials and other fuels for specific engine applications and collaborating on Mascoma’s efforts to
expand its commercialization projects globally, including promotion of increased biofuels distribution.

Chrysler’s Big 10
Chrysler offers 10 FFV models in the United States in 2009—the same number and models the company
offered in 2008—an impressively broad range. The company has been making FFVs since 1998, longer than
any of the other five automakers. From a minivan to a convertible, chances are a consumer will find an FFV
that best suits them. “As the price of fuel has risen, many consumers are looking for smaller engines in an
FFV,” Lampert says. “The 2.7 liter Avenger and Sebring address that demand.”
Models include: Chrysler: Aspen, Sebring (convertible and sedan) and Town and Country; Dodge: Avenger,
Dakota, Durango, Grand Caravan and Ram 1500; Jeep: Commander and Grand Cherokee. This is the
seventh consecutive year of E85 capability for the Chrysler Sebring sedan, the company’s veteran FFV. The
Dodge Ram 1500 will enter its sixth consecutive year.

Ford’s Lineup
Offering more than double the number of FFVs than it did in 2008, Ford has made great progress towards its
50 percent E85 conversion goal in one year. Ford models include: Ford: Crown Victoria, F-150, *E-Series
Commercial Van, Wagon and Cutaway, *Expedition/Expedition EL; Mercury: Grand Marquis; Lincoln:
*Town Car and *Navigator.

“Our big story for the coming year is the all-new F-150, which has an FFV option,” says Ford spokesman
Mark Schirmer. “The 2009 F-150 goes on sale this month (October) and is another big step forward in our
leadership story.” The new F-150 is categorized as a “superior fuel economy” edition that the automaker
says delivers 15 miles per gallon (mpg) in the city and 21 mpg on the highway. A considerable improvement
compared with last year’s 5.4-liter V8 F-150, which achieved 13 mpg in the city and 17 mpg on the
highway. This is the fourth consecutive year in which Ford is offering the F-150 with a FFV option.
Toronto expands Green Bin Program
By Ron Kotrba Biomass Magazine.

Web exclusive posted Nov. 24, 2008 at 5:02 p.m. CST

In an effort to encourage more residents to recycle, while also increasing organic material for two anaerobic
digestion facilities, on Nov. 19, Toronto Mayor David Miller announced that the city’s Green Bin Program
has expanded to now include 4,500 multi-unit buildings such as apartments, condominiums and co-ops. The
program, which encourages residents to recycle organic materials like table scraps and soiled diapers, began
in the early 2000s and was limited to single-family households. Already 510,000 single-family households in
the city participate, and City Councilor Glenn De Baeremaeker told Biomass Magazine the program has
enjoyed a 95 percent success rate at getting its residents to participate. Over the next 18 months,
approximately 300 apartment buildings and condominiums will be brought into the Green Bin Program
every month. The city estimates 30,000 metric tons of organics from these multi-unit buildings will be
diverted from landfills and can be used as either composting material in producing fertilizer or as residential
“source-separated organics’ for use at two proposed 55,000 metric tons per year anaerobic digestion (AD)
facilities that will produce methane gas to generate green electricity.

Toronto owns a 25,000 metric ton per year facility at its Dufferin Transfer Station, which started operating
in 2002, where the material is anaerobically digested using German BTA technology and a wet pretreatment
hydropulping process. Through screening and settling unwanted plastics or other non-digestible materials
are removed prior to the organic slurry moving into the digestion tank. Plant manager Doug Beattie said the
facility was built as more of a front-end demonstration plant to see if the system would work. He said the
methane gas produced on site is flared off because the facility was not designed to produce energy, but
rather to demonstrate that the front-end AD technology and pretreatment process would work.

The city owns four other facilities where collected organics are composted and turned into fertilizer. The
Green Bin Program is part of the city of Toronto’s plan to achieve 70 percent landfill diversion. The city
estimates that 30 percent of all household waste is organic material.

Indiana county approves trash-to-ethanol facility
By Kris Bevill

Web exclusive posted Nov. 28, 2008 at 4:50 p.m. CST

After months of negotiations and meetings, Lake County, Ind., officials voted 14-4 at a late November
meeting approving a 15-year contract with Powers Energy One of Indiana to construct and operate a 32
MMgy ethanol production facility. The county will pay a tipping fee to the company in exchange for the
plant to convert the county’s usable trash to ethanol.

Prior to approving the Powers One contract, the board had previously considered bids from Genahol-Powers
One LLC and Agresti Biofuels. Powers Energy One President Earl Powers told Ethanol Producer Magazine
he believes his company won the contract because it offered the most feasible MSW-to-ethanol technology.
“The process is a revolutionary step forward in addressing two major issues facing our nation: the
environmental problems caused by our difficulties in disposing of the mountains of waste we produce; and
finding a cost-effective way to provide alternative energy from domestic sources,” Powers said.

The gasification/fermentation process that will be used at the facility was purchased by Powers Energy One
from technology-provider INEOS Bio. The technology has been put to use at an INEOS Bio pilot-scale
facility in Fayetteville, Ark., for five years, according to Powers, and was a major selling point to members
of the Lake County Solid Waste Management District.
Final site selection for the $211 million facility will begin the first week of December, Powers said. He
expects permitting to take up to four months and construction an additional 12 to 18 months, making the
2010 opening goal an optimistic bet.

U.S.DEPT. AGRICULTURE ARS: CQSTER model can evaluate soil quality
By Anna Austin

Web exclusive posted Nov. 25, 2008 at 12:43 p.m. CST

The development of soil management practices to maintain adequate soil organic matter (SOM) is essential
for making prudent decisions regarding land use for food, fiber, feed and bioenergy, according to an article
by the USDA -Agricultural Research Services that was recently published in the Soil Science Society of
American Journal.
The report details methods of measuring soil quality using the carbon sequestration (CQSTER) model, and
predicts long-term soil organic matter and soil organic carbon changes caused by an array of practices
including crop residue removal.

The CQSTER model is described in the report as a tool used to relate organic residue additions, crop
management, and soil tillage to SOM accretion or loss. “Given the high correlation of simulated and
observed SOM changes, CQESTR can be used as a reliable tool to predict SOM changes from management
practices and offers the potential for estimating soil carbon storage required for carbon credits,” the article
stated. “It can also be an important tool to estimate the impacts of crop residue removal for bioenergy
production on SOM level and soil production capacity.”

ARS scientists selected four previously conducted long-term experiments with several management systems
to examine the ability of the CQSTER to simulate the long-term effects of practices such as crop rotation,
organic amendments and tillage practices. Two of the experiments were 100-year studies done in
Champaign, Ill., and Columbia, Mo., and the other two were 20-year studies done in Lincoln and Sidney,
The CQSTER model successfully simulated the detrimental effect of 50 or more years of crop residue
removal on SOM dynamics, according to the report. “Management practices that increase biomass, limit
inversion tillage, and return root and shoot biomass to the soil annually promote C accretion,” it stated. “The
CQESTR model can be used to examine the expected effect of planned or proposed changes in agricultural
management practices on soil C contents at the field scale.”

The scientists also found that the use of the CQESTR model allows evaluation of management options so
that sustainability can be considered along with soil productivity. “More studies are needed to evaluate the
CQESTR model’s performance in predicting the amount of crop residue required to maintain the SOM
concentration in different soils under a wide range of management and climatic conditions,” the article

The report is available on the Soil Science Society of American Journal Web site at no charge until Dec. 20.
THE LAND 13/10/08

Ethanol energy efficiencies improve
13/10/2008 10:54:00 AM
Ethanol production is more energy efficient than previously thought as processing plants continue to make
upgrades and changes to improve the process. A recent report by John Christianson, certified public accountant for
the independent United States accounting firm Christianson & Associates PLLP, catalogues the energy
improvements being made at ethanol biorefineries across the country. According to the report, the average
amount of energy, measured in British thermal units (Btus), required to produce ethanol and a livestock feed co-
product across all ethanol production technologies was reduced 13.5pc between 2004 and 2007. The most efficient
biorefineries demonstrated an even more dramatic reduction in energy requirements of 19pc and today use
fewer than 21,000 Btus/gal of ethanol produced (see table). A large portion of the energy consumed in an
ethanol plant is for the production of distillers grains, with production of dried distillers grains consuming
much more than wet production. A noticeable industry trend reflects reducing the Btus consumed per gallon as
improved production practices and technology occur. The efficiency gains are larger for the leaders, which
represent the newer, more efficient plants.
Another trend is that developing ethanol plants are emphasizing energy efficiencies of production. Likewise,
ethanol biorefineries have also cut electricity usage. The Christianson report shows a 13pc reduction in
electricity consumption at the average ethanol facility. Ethanol yield efficiency is measured by the gallons of
ethanol that can be produced from a bushel of corn. In 2004, the industry had an average yield of 2.80
denatured gallons, with the leaders at 2.87 gal/bu.

This denatured yield was consistent over a four-year time period due to a varying denaturant rate usage.
However, there was an increase in un-denatured yield - from 2.66 gal of ethanol per bushel in 2004 to 2.70
gal/bu in 2007. The leaders also increased from 2.73 in 2004 to 2.77 gal/bu. in 2007. This increase in un-
denatured yield can be attributed to improved plant technologies as well as more experienced management
teams at the plants, the report noted.

Findings of the Christianson report are consistent with results released in March from the US Department of
Energy's Argonne National Laboratory analysis that showed improving efficiency of the US ethanol industry
between 2001 and 2006. The Argonne study found that US ethanol facilities are using less energy and water
than five years ago but producing more ethanol. Water consumption is down 26.6pc, grid electricity use is
down almost 16pc and total energy use is about 22pc lower.

Energy balance.
Soon-to-be released research conducted under the supervision of Dr Kenneth Cassman at the University of
Nebraska-Lincoln's Nebraska Center for Energy Sciences Research confirms a continuation of better efficiencies
in ethanol plants. "Recent research conducted at the University of Nebraska clearly shows that estimates for the
energy balance of corn-based ethanol are much more favorable - in fact, two to three times more favorable than
previous estimates," Cassman said.

"That's because most of the published values for energy efficiency of corn ethanol are 'backward looking' in the
sense that they evaluated older technologies with regard to energy use in corn production, the biorefinery and
co-product utilization."

Cassman, who is also a Heuermann professor of agronomy at the university, said it is important to understand
that ethanol has a substantial net positive direct energy balance: 1.5-1.6 more units of energy are derived from
ethanol than are used to produce it. "Using dated information simply doesn't work in a world where the
technology and efficiency of corn and ethanol production are rapidly improving over the years," he said.
"Moreover, if the goal is to reduce dependence on imported oil, we estimate that 13 gal. of ethanol are produced
for every gallon of petroleum used in the production lifecycle for corn ethanol."
Feedstuffs, USA

Kevin Mitchell.
Coordinator One Nation NSW Farmer Ethanol Awareness Campaign.
Email Tel. 0249846358


Shared By:
doc5671 doc5671