Will ethanol go the way of biodiesel in Rock County?
MILTON — The United Ethanol plant might be operating at full capacity and boosting the local economy, but at least one plant opponent doesn’t think it will last.
Leanne Glorvigen, one of the leading critics of the plant during planning and construction, points to recent troubles in the biodiesel industry and worries they could spread to the ethanol field.
North Prairie Productions announced in November it was halting production on a $42 million biodiesel plant in Evansville because the cost of soybeans has gotten too high for biodiesel to be profitable.
“I think that’s a portent of things to come with ethanol,” Glorvigen said.
Although ethanol producers have seen corn prices rise, the industry is more stable than biodiesel, said Joe Johansen, vice president of ethanol operations at United Ethanol.
“The ethanol industry is not as lucrative as it was two years ago, but ethanol is here to stay,” he said.
Glorvigen isn’t so sure. She referred to a Wall Street Journal column that ran Nov. 24. In it, Robert W. Hahn, co-chairman of President George H.W. Bush’s U.S. Alternative Fuels Council, argued ethanol is not cost efficient and has little environmental benefit.
In 2005, ethanol took about 15 percent of U.S. corn supplies but displaced less than 2 percent of gasoline use, Hahn wrote.
“Even if all corn produced in the U.S. were devoted to distilling ethanol, the renewable fuel would amount to about 12 percent of the gasoline demand in 2005,” he wrote.
But Johansen is confident U.S. farmers will find a way to meet ethanol producers’ demand for corn, he said.
Studies claiming corn ethanol isn’t cost efficient or environmentally friendly are outdated because new technology has reduced energy use and lowered costs, Johansen said.
“The biggest thing I feel comfortable about is we’re environmentally friendly,” he said.
Click here to read the main story about the economic impact of the ethanol plant
related STORIES
Dec 16, 2007 at 9:22 p.m.
Suggest removal
fldpln: I know you really are eager to legalize your hobby, but pushing its byproducts??
Actually, trees could be harvested for this ethanol because they are not harvesting mature trees, they are harvesting trees engineered for this use. These trees will grow on otherwise barren land.
Dec 16, 2007 at 9:10 p.m.
Suggest removal
There was a good article in the Milwaukee paper about ethanol from wood and how Wisconsin's paper mills could have a big role in it. It sounded like it was better than making it from corn and what they need for it was a by-product of paper production.
I would like to see more biodiesel. Ethanol from corn is it least efficient form. Biodiesel on the other hand is the most efficient fuel not from oil from what I get from the USA Today. We just need to get more diesel cars on the road like in Europe. Diesel is not like it used to be.
Dec 16, 2007 at 1:34 p.m.
Suggest removal
Has anyone heard about the benifit of Wood Ethanol. From memory, corn ethanol produces 1.2 units of energy for every unit of energy used to create it. (a 20% yeild).
To my recolection, wood ethanol will produce 10.0+ units to every one unit invested. Wood ethanol is created from the sucrose sugar found in all plants. Researchers have already bio-engineered a tree that will grow to harvest maturity, on unfertile soil, within 3-5 years.
Just do a google search if your bored and snowed in.
Dec 16, 2007 at 10:36 a.m.
Suggest removal
The problem with ethanol certainly isn't opposition to plants being built. In fact SO MANY have been built that this has become significant. So NIMBY is not the problem here at all.
There are benefits to ethanol, but primarily in that it burns cleaner. It does not reduce petroleum imports because petroleum is needed to support the agriculture, from transportation to being an essential component of fertilizer. In fact some scientists believe that ethanol, mpg for mpg, leads to *increased* oil imports. Even if you need 3/4 of a gallon of oil to create a gallon of ethanol, this is a very inefficient way to replace oil imports.
That's not liberal vs. conservative, that's just science.
Dec 16, 2007 at 9:24 a.m.
Suggest removal
I am honestly against ethanol for this reason. It is made out of corn. We have an established market for corn besides ethanol. While I am sure many people are able to handle the price increases for food that increased ethanol production will certainly induce, and have already with more to come, many will bear hardship as a result, moreso in foreign lands than here. Even with a very good corn crop the price has risen.Is this form of energy worth the potential food shortages? Or do we say of the hungry, let them eat cake?
Dec 16, 2007 at 9:04 a.m.
Suggest removal
How can anyone honestly be against ethanol? I tell you I'm getting really sick of these bleeding heart liberals that say we need to become energy independent by finding alternatives to oil. Well, once we have a great alternative that will also help our nations farmers, the liberals say, "we don't want a plant in our town!!!" Why not? Your town or city doesn't need new job growth?
Before you post a comment, consider this:
Note: GazetteXtra.com does not condone or review every comment. Read more in our User Policy AgreementPost Comment
Commenting requires registration.