Domestic automakers have been advertising their flex-fuel vehicles as an answer to independence from foreign oil. That’s because they burn a mix of gasoline and domestically-produced ethanol. But ethanol production has been inefficient. Lester Graham reports:
Transcript
Domestic automakers have been advertising their flex-fuel vehicles as an answer to independence from foreign oil. That’s because they burn a mix of gasoline and domestically produced ethanol. But ethanol production has been inefficient. Lester Graham reports:
Ford Motor Company chairman Bill Ford, Junior says his company increased flex-fuel vehicles on assurances there would be a better source for ethanol.
“It has been mostly corn-based and we knew, we do know that long-term that’s not the answer.”
The hope was breakthroughs to mass produce cellulosic ethanol made from woody plants or waste wood chips were coming quickly. That didn’t happen.
“But, I’ll say this: if we don’t end up with cellulosic ethanol, we’re going to hit the wall pretty quickly in terms of vehicle penetration on ethanol.”
Ford says automakers are looking to fuel providers to find an energy answer that makes sense for mass production. In the meantime his company plans to make lighter vehicles with smaller, but powerful fuel-efficient engines that burn gasoline.
For the Environment Report, this is Lester Graham.
The jars are from a mildly more successful canning party than that described in our tale. If we can, you can, too. (Photo by Jennifer Szweda Jordan)
The Canning Club picture is from the 1918 book, Use Your Government:
What Your Government Does for You, by Alissa Franc.
It’s harvest season – that time of year when farmers are selling cucumbers,
tomatoes and corn for cheap because there’s such bounty. So what do you do
with that kind of surplus? Jennifer Szweda Jordan followed one author’s
advice for preserving:
Transcript
It’s harvest season – that time of year when farmers are selling cucumbers,
tomatoes and corn for cheap because there’s such bounty. So what do you do
with that kind of surplus? Jennifer Szweda Jordan followed one author’s
advice for preserving:
Not long ago, I heard an interview with author Barbara Kingsolver about her
newest book, Animal, Vegetable, Miracle: A Year of Food Life.
Kingsolver and her family spent a year mostly eating foods they’d harvested
on their own or bought from local farms. The idea was to prove to herself
that her family could live well while cutting down the fuel used in food
transportation. In the interview, she mentioned that the family had canning
parties. Well, that was enough to inspire me.
I ordered a half-bushel of tomatoes from a local organic farmer and headed
to Ann Murray’s house. Ann’s a friend and co-worker whose family used to
can:
“I have to tell you what my father says of canning, he says: eat what you can, what
you can’t, can, and it’s so true.”
As a kid in rural West Virginia, Ann was the shucker of corn and the snipper
of beans. She never had a leading role at the pressure cooker – that tightly
sealed pot with the frightening capacity to explode if handled incorrectly.
Like me, the friends who joined us, Robin Hewlett and Matt Willard don’t
know much about canning either.
For canning instruction we turn to the 1964 edition of The Joy of Cooking.
Check out the language in this book: “Good organization and proper
equipment simplify canning and give you, with a minimum of effort, gay-
looking shelves of glistening, jewel-like jars… all labeled and dated and
ready to use.”
Matt recalls a similar book from his childhood:
“My mom had the Betty Crocker cookbook from like 1965 and they had like
explicit pictures of the process and I always found it really intriguing to read
through that ’cause I was like, I live in NYC, no one cans here. That was so
far from my mind. I’m thinking of some person in Wyoming on a farm like
actually still canning… But now it’s coming full circle, it’s great.”
Not many people think much about canning these days. But the process has
a rich history. Learning to preserve food this way actually helped Napoleon
win wars. Now canning has made its way into Ann Murray’s kitchen, where
we’re waiting for a pot of water to boil. We’ve scalded, and skinned our
tomatoes. Now we lay out our plan for organization that Joy of Cooking
promises will leave us with glistening jars:
(Sound of people talking while canning)
Anyway, what do we know? We try to get the right amount of tomatoes in
the jar – not too much so they’ll explode, but not so little that we’re mostly
packing water.
We submerge eight quarts into boiling water and wait what seems like a very
long 45 minutes. Ann throws us a bone to keep us going:
“They’re lookin’ beautiful, guys. Lookin like my mother’s cupboard.”
Since Ann’s the only one with actual canning memories, we’re all ears:
“I just remember it being really hot outside, incredibly hot, steamy in the kitchen. I felt like my mom was sacrificing a little so
we could have canned stuff. But it was always so great to open it up in the
middle of the winter.”
At the end of six hours, we only have 12 quarts of tomato jars to show for it.
I’m a little disappointed because I wish we could’ve been more efficient. I
mean, it’s a good thing we’re not in the French military, right, because we, like,
seriously couldn’t survive on this:
(Hewlett:) ” I feel like the sitting around and the canning is part of the social canning party
aspect.”
They eventually had me convinced that we were productive enough. Until I
did some searches on the internet about canning parties. In a 1918 book
called Use Your Government: What Your Government Does For
You, there are tables listing teams of Kansas canners and their output.
If I read correctly, Mrs. P.W. Rieger, aided by 17-year-old Bernadette
Rieger, canned 622 and one half quarts of fruit, vegetables, soups and meats.
Wow, I wonder if I’m too old to join 4-H?
For The Environment Report, this is Jennifer Szweda Jordan.
Jenny Chang at a farmers' market with her produce. (Photo by Joel Grostephan)
Demand for corn-based ethanol is growing and that’s made farmland more valuable. This
year, American farmers planted 14 million acres more corn than they did last year. Some
small immigrant farmers believe that’s why they’re having a hard time finding land to rent
to grow fresh fruits and vegetables. Joel Grostephan reports:
Transcript
Demand for corn-based ethanol is growing and that’s made farmland more valuable. This
year, American farmers planted 14 million acres more corn than they did last year. Some
small immigrant farmers believe that’s why they’re having a hard time finding land to rent
to grow fresh fruits and vegetables. Joel Grostephan reports:
Jenny Chang doesn’t want to change the government’s policy on ethanol subsidies. She
just wants some good land to raise her vegetables that she sells at the farmer’s market.
When planting time came around this year, she was still looking for a plot to rent. Chang is
Hmong and she came from Laos more than 20 years ago with few job skills. For
the last 7 years, she’s made part of her income from farming on land she rents. In the
past, finding land to rent wasn’t that hard. But, Chang says through her daughter who
interprets for her, this year was different:
“She said that this year, we couldn’t find land, that’s why we got stuck with this bad area.
She’s really sad.”
With corn selling for double what it did last year, land values are going up. That means
rent is going up. And the 300 Hmong farmers in this area are having a hard time finding
land they can afford.
Kent Olson is an economics professor at the University of Minnesota. He says he thinks
land scarcity is due to higher demand for ethanol:
“Your ethanol may have started the ball rolling, and created higher prices for corn, which
pushed corn onto other land from other crops but that’s pushed soybean prices up. So we
are seeing higher rent from a couple different directions.”
In theory, ethanol from corn is supposed to be good for the environment. It burns cleaner
and means less reliance on foreign oil.
But… conventional corn farmers rely on fossil fuel-based fertilizers and chemical
pesticides. By the time their diesel-powered tractors plant the corn, combines harvest it,
trucks transport it and ethanol distillery plants cook it, the energy gain from corn ethanol
is marginal.
The Hmong farm differently. Most don’t use fossil fuel-based fertilizers or pesticides.
Instead, they do a lot of hand weeding, and put in long days. Jenny Chang fertilizes her
tomatoes with chicken manure. Chang’s daughter, who is also named Jenny Chang, says
many older Hmong farmers are suspicious of chemicals:
“They like gardening the way they used to back in old Laos. They don’t really know what
insecticides and pesticides are, or how to use it so that’s why they just don’t use it. And a lot of
people are afraid of cancer, so they just like to grow things organically because they eat it
themselves.”
And researchers say growing food this way seems more environmentally friendly than
growing corn for ethanol.
Bill Moseley is a professor at Macalester College in St. Paul. He studies the
environmental effects of agriculture:
“Conventional corn production is displacing, in this particular case, a form of
agriculture that is more environmentally sound in terms of it’s using fewer fossil
fuel imports, and it’s producing crops for the local market, it’s particularly ironic in
this instance.”
Government officials don’t think increased corn production for ethanol is the problem.
Perry Aasness works with the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Farm Service Agency. When he learned the Hmong farmers were having a hard time finding land to rent, his
agency helped them. But Aasness believes corn production for ethanol is NOT the cause
of the land shortage:
“Well, at least in Minnesota I think it’s very, very minimal. I think the real issue that I
have seen in Minnesota is that the Hmong farmers, the Hmong community is primarily
based in the Twin Cities metro area. They have to go further out to get land — a lot
of it I think is just due to urban sprawl.”
For many people in the Minneapolis-St. Paul area, the Hmong are the face of agriculture
at farmers markets. But since no government agency keeps track of their numbers, it’s
hard to know if their tradition of raising crops on small plots of rented land is going well,
or if ethanol and high corn prices are actually putting their small businesses in danger of.
Farmer Laura Krouse says the ethanol boom has been great for corn farmers, who she says are finally getting a fair price for their corn. But she says she's worried that there's not enough being done fast enough to reduce the dead zone in the Gulf of Mexico. (Photo by Rebecca Williams)
Laura Krouse's Iowa farm. (Photo by Rebecca Williams)
Laura Krouse built a prairie wetland to filter water running off her farm and part of her neighbor's farm. Wetlands remove the soluble form of nitrogen - called nitrate - from the water. (Photo by Rebecca Williams)
Ethanol plants are sprouting up across the Corn Belt. 14 million acres more corn was planted this year to meet demand for corn ethanol. Scientists warn that could mean a lot more nitrogen fertilizer pollution draining into the Gulf. (Photo by Lester Graham)
Gulf of Mexico shrimpers are hurt by the "dead zone." Scientists point to nitrogen fertilizer from the Corn Belt as the main cause of the dead zone. (Photo by Lester Graham)
Management practices by some farmers do little to prevent nitrogen runoff from going into rivers that eventually dump into the Gulf of Mexico. (Photo by Lester Graham)
Scientists are predicting the Dead Zone in the Gulf of Mexico will reach its largest size ever this summer. Fish and shrimp can’t survive in the Dead Zone. It’s believed to be mainly caused by fertilizer washed from farm fields across the nation. Rebecca Williams reports some scientists say demand for ethanol made from corn could make the Dead Zone even bigger:
Transcript
Scientists are predicting the dead zone in the Gulf of Mexico will reach its largest size ever this summer. Fish and shrimp can’t survive in the dead zone. It’s believed to be mainly caused by fertilizer washed from farm fields across the nation. Rebecca Williams reports some scientists say demand for ethanol made from corn could make the dead zone even bigger:
(Sound of tractor raking hay)
“It’s the perfect Iowa day, you know?”
Laura Krouse is tearing apart a bale of hay to mulch her tomatoes.
She’s a thousand miles from the Gulf of Mexico. But she points out,
what happens on farms here ends up affecting life way down South:
“This watershed I live in drains 25% of Iowa. And we’re one of the
richest farming states in the nation – of course we have something to
do with it.”
By “it,” Krouse means the dead zone. All or parts of 31 farm states
drain into the Mississippi River, which empties into the Gulf.
Scientists point to nitrogen fertilizer used on farm fields as the main
cause of the dead zone. All that nitrogen causes an enormous algae
bloom. When the algae dies it drops to the ocean floor. Bacteria eat
the algae and they rob the water of oxygen.
This summer, the dead zone’s predicted to reach a record size. It could get as big as the state of New Jersey.
Laura Krouse has been trying to cut back her own role in the dead zone.
Five years ago, she added something to her farm that’s rare around here.
Krouse cut some of the tile lines that drain water from her farm, and
replaced part of her farmland with a prairie wetland. She says that
made her neighbors nervous:
“We just don’t see people taking land out of production in Iowa very
frequently.”
Wetlands like this one remove nitrogen from the water that flows from
farm fields.
It’s one of the things a government task force on the dead zone
recommended to cut nitrogen loading into the Gulf.
But instead of a big push to restore wetlands, the economic landscape
is changing in the other direction. Demand for ethanol has led to
historically high corn prices. And that’s encouraging farmers to grow
more corn. A USDA report says farmers have planted 14 million more
acres of corn this year than last year. It’s the most corn planted in
the U.S. in more than 50 years.
Laura Krouse says this is not good for the Gulf of Mexico:
“I’m concerned about all the extra corn because it requires nitrogen to
produce that corn and no matter how careful we are and no matter how
expensive it is which causes us to be more and more careful with
application, nitrogen as a molecule just wants to get away. It is
leaky.”
When it rains, nitrogen runs quickly from farm fields and gets into
creeks and rivers. The federal government’s task force on the dead zone has been trying to
tackle all this.
Don Scavia led a group of scientists advising the task force under the
Clinton Administration. The Bush Administration convened a new science
panel to review the original science panel’s work. Don Scavia says
since then, there’s been very little progress in shrinking the dead
zone, or what scientists call an area of hypoxia:
“In fact what we’ve seen in the last year is just the opposite with
this push towards corn-based ethanol production. Even acres that were
set aside into conservation are coming back out into production, into
corn, and the increased nitrogen load to the Gulf this year and the projected record
hypoxia is probably caused by this increased corn production.”
Scavia says if the dead zone keeps increasing, the Gulf shrimping
industry could collapse.
Ironically, the new science panel appointed by the Bush White House is
calling for even bigger cuts in nitrogen than the first panel appointed
by the Clinton Administration. They want to reduce nitrogen from farm
fields and other sources by 40 to 45 percent.
Don Parrish is with the American Farm Bureau. He says those reductions
are too much:
“Those are going to be really difficult and they could cause
significant economic dislocation at a time when I think we need to be
thinking about the products that agriculture produces, and those are
important.”
There’s no question corn for ethanol is at the top of that list right
now. Ethanol’s popular. It’s making farmers richer. It’s making the
chemical companies that supply nitrogen richer. The government task
force has to figure out how to cut back on all the nitrogen that’s
needed to grow all the corn… that’s needed for billions of gallons of
ethanol.
As ethanol is becoming more common, the demand for corn is driving up prices for the grain. (Photo by Lester Graham)
Using corn to make fuel for cars and trucks will cause more pollution, higher food prices,
and will not greatly reduce the country’s dependence on foreign oil. That’s according to a
recent report by several environmental groups. Mark Brush has more:
Transcript
Using corn to make fuel for cars and trucks will cause more pollution, higher food prices,
and will not greatly reduce the country’s dependence on foreign oil. That’s according to a
recent report by several environmental groups. Mark Brush has more:
About 20% of this year’s crop in the US will go into making ethanol. That’s expected to jump to 27% next year. The push for more corn-based ethanol has already led to higher food prices. A new report
says if the ethanol trend continues unchecked – it will cause more fertilizer pollution in
water – and more air pollution from ethanol processing plants powered by coal and
natural gas.
Dulce Fernandez is with the Network for New Energy Solutions – one of the groups that
put out the report. She says ethanol is not the answer:
“I think everybody is looking for one great solution to solve all of these problems. But
nobody is thinking about the great potential that is out there to reduce demands.”
Fernandez says the best way to reduce demands is for the federal government to raise fuel
economy standards, instead of subsidizing corn-based ethanol.
Farming is big business in America's heartland. Many farmers say they want to be left alone to run their farms the way they always have - and they don't want government regulators or researchers dictating to them. (Photo by Rebecca Williams)
Farm pollution is the biggest water contamination problem in the
nation. But government agencies often struggle with getting farmers to
use less polluting farming methods. Many farmers say they don’t want
outsiders telling them what to do. Rebecca Williams reports one
grassroots project is trying to encourage farmers to change, by relying
on peer pressure:
Transcript
Farm pollution is the biggest water contamination problem in the
nation. But government agencies often struggle with getting farmers to
use less polluting farming methods. Many farmers say they don’t want
outsiders telling them what to do. Rebecca Williams reports one
grassroots project is trying to encourage farmers to change, by relying
on peer pressure:
(Sound of birds and buzzing insects)
The corn around here is way over knee high, and there’s a whole lot of
it. This is Iowa, after all. So, pretty much everyone farms corn and
soybeans.
But there isn’t as much farming happening today. Dozens of farmers are
hanging out by a creek that meanders through farmland. They’re
checking out the day’s catch.
(Sound of splashing around in bucket)
“Now there’s one really bright-colored southern red belly in here, kind
of the prettiest fish we’ve got in this stretch.”
Biologist Dan Kirby just used an electroshocker. It stuns the fish and
they float to the top of the water. Now that he can see them, he can
get an idea of how many fish there are and how big they are. The
farmers are watching closely.
(Farmer:) “That’s a real good sign to see them that big, at this
point?”
(Kirby:) “Yeah, especially the southern red belly – they do classify
them a little bit different, they consider them to be a sensitive
species, so it’s a good thing to have them there at that adult size,
for sure.”
That’s better news than they might’ve been expecting. This creek
running along many of the farmers’ fields is in trouble. It’s on
Iowa’s impaired waters list. In this case, that means the fish and
other aquatic life in the creek are not doing as well as they should
be.
“In some of these streams we have had some rough times. Chronic issues
where fish were not even getting to size they could catch them or else
were just plain absent.”
Dan Kirby says farm pollution such as excess fertilizer and soil
erosion from farm fields can harm fish and other stream life. That’s
the kind of thing that put this creek on the government’s watch list
three years ago.
One of the farmers, Jeff Pape, remembers hearing about that. For him it was a big
red flag:
“We knew there was an impaired waterway and it was running through some
of the land I rent and obviously I don’t want that to shine on me… I
didn’t want the DNR – not that they would or have the time to do
it, but I didn’t want them to come in and say hey, you will be doing
this, or you will be doing that.”
Pape says the fear of being dictated to by the government was a strong
motivator for him and a few of his neighbors. In late 2004, Pape
formed a watershed council with nine of his farming neighbors.
Now there are nearly 50 farmers in the group. Pape says there are some ground
rules: No finger pointing. And everyone gets equal say:
“That’s nice with this group – nobody’s telling them they have to do
anything – they do what they want when they want and that’s it. You
know, they don’t do any more than they want to.”
Pape says he’s proud of what he and his neighbors have gotten done.
They’re installing grass strips along ditches and creeks to filter
water rushing off fields. They’re putting in fences to keep cattle
from tearing up stream beds and banks. They’re being more careful
about how much fertilizer they apply.
Maybe most importantly, they’ve gotten a lot of their neighbors to join
them. Jeff Pape says cash incentives help – farmers are paid for the
conservation projects they do. It’s not as much money as some of the
government’s conservation programs, but it keeps the government out of
their hair.
Pape says this program works because there’s an even stronger
motivation:
“That guy’s looking over your fence – he sees you ain’t got a waterway
and you’re thinking about it, so that peer pressure thing does make a
difference too. You know everybody’s watching each other in this
watershed – not pointing fingers at nobody but everybody’s watching
each other and that keeps people on their toes – they want things to
look right, too.”
Other farmers here agree that a farmer-to-farmer project is going to be
much more effective than anything government regulators or researchers
say.
John Rodecap is with Iowa State University Extension Service. He’s
been helping these farmers clean up the creek. He says it’s remarkable
that more than half of the farmers in this 23,000-acre watershed have
signed on.
“The trials that they do, they talk about it at their coffee shop, they
talk about it over the fence… If the trial’s done 50, 60, 100 miles
away, that’s not good enough. They want to know how it’s gonna work on
my farm.”
Rodecap says if you see your neighbor making a change first, you’re
going to feel a little more comfortable giving it a try yourself. And
knowing your neighbor’s watching you over the fence… that’s a powerful
incentive all its own.
Some people are warning there are hidden costs
to the drive for ethanol. The demand for corn-based
ethanol for fuel has pushed the price of corn close
to the highest price it’s been in 10 years. In the
first of our two-part series on ethanol, Rebecca Williams
reports that economists say the push for more ethanol will
mean higher prices at the supermarket:
Transcript
Some people are warning there are hidden costs
to the drive for ethanol. The demand for corn-based
ethanol for fuel has pushed the price of corn close
to the highest price it’s been in 10 years. In the
first of our two-part series on ethanol, Rebecca Williams
reports that economists say the push for more ethanol will
mean higher prices at the supermarket:
(Sound of burger sizzling)
Everything in your classic American meal has one thing in common.
(Sound of soda can opening and fizzing)
The burger, chips, soda, even the ketchup. They all depend on corn.
Cows eat corn. Chips have corn oil in them. And your soda and ketchup
have high fructose corn syrup as a main ingredient. Supermarkets are
loaded with food that has something to do with corn.
And lately, corn’s been near its highest price in ten years. The price
has nearly doubled. Everyone from livestock producers to beverage
companies has been feeling the squeeze of more expensive corn. And
that’s been starting to show up at the grocery store.
The US Department of Agriculture predicts our food is going to get more
expensive this year, and maybe for many years to come.
Ephraim Leibtag is a USDA economist. He says we’ll probably be paying
between two and a half and three and a half percent more this year at
the store:
“That’s on average for your food bill. So if you’re buying an average
basket of products and you spend $100 when you go to the store, now
you’ll be spending $103. But you’ll see it first in products most
related to corn. In addition you’ll see some after-effects because if
more corn is produced that may drive up the price of other commodities
if the tradeoff in land is between, let’s say, corn and other potential farm
products.”
So if farmers plant more corn for ethanol instead of soybeans, that
will drive up the price of soybeans, and in turn, the food that’s made
from them.
It turns out that’s exactly what farmers are planning to do this year.
A recent USDA report says farmers will be planting 12 million more
acres of corn than last year… and less soybeans, and rice.
Leibtag says high corn prices have been great for corn farmers, but he
says it’s been rough on a lot of other people:
“If you use corn as a main ingredient you’ve already noticed your costs
go up quite a bit. Some companies have explored the possibility of
substituting or using other products. But certainly producers of livestock and
poultry have higher feed costs. They have to think about exactly how they’re
going to produce their product when one of their inputs goes up 20, 30,
50, 80 percent in price.”
Ethanol backers say it’s just a matter of time before the market will
adjust to more expensive corn. Bob Dinneen is the president of the
Renewable Fuels Association:
“Corn prices are indeed going up… Our own industry is paying more for feedstock for ethanol today. But
at the end of the day, as the marketplace adjusts, we’ll be able to grow
more than sufficient grain to satisfy the country’s demand for food,
fuel and fiber and rural America will be better for it.”
But others argue it won’t be possible to have it all forever. Lester
Brown is the president of the Earth Policy Institute:
“Usually in the past, rises in food prices come when we have a poor
harvest somewhere in the world as a result of weather and therefore is temporary. It usually
lasts a year or so and weather comes back to normal and we get a good
harvest again. What we’re looking at now is continuous pressure on
prices as far as we can comfortably see in the future, simply because in
agricultural terms, the demand for automotive fuel is insatiable.”
Brown says we’re at risk of trading food for ethanol fuel. And he says
it’s not just going to impact food prices in the US. It’s also going
to affect food supplies worldwide, especially in developing countries.
“The biggest effects are hitting people in other countries who consume
corn more directly, like Mexico for example, which has a corn-based diet and there
the price of tortillas has gone up about 60 percent.”
Brown says many US politicians have what he calls “ethanol euphoria.”
He’s called for a moratorium on licensing new ethanol plants. He wants
the government to think about whether it makes sense to keep
subsidizing ethanol made from corn.
Many people, even some in the ethanol industry, say ethanol from corn
is a limited solution. So researchers are looking for ways to make
ethanol from other sources, such as woody plants like switchgrass.
In the meantime, ethanol from corn is still the most viable option.
Economists say if corn gets diverted into ethanol on a large scale,
that might mean we’ll all be paying higher food prices for the next
several years.
Corn requires more fossil fuel-based nitrogen fertilizer than many other crops. Tanks of pressurized anhydrous ammonia fixes nitrogen in the soil, but heavy rains can wash nitrogen into waterways. (Photo by Lester Graham)
Farmers are paid to put grassy strips to act as buffer zones along waterways. Some farmers don't sign up for the program. With higher corn prices and a moratorium on the program, more farmers might be tempted to plow right to the edge of streams. (Photo by Lester Graham)
In the fall and spring, farmers incorporate nitrogen into fields to fertilize crops. However, some of the nitrogen ends up polluting waterways. (Photo by Lester Graham)
Pressure to plant more corn for ethanol will mean about 12 million acres more corn this year. It will also mean more pressure to put land into production that should be set aside to protect the environment. (Photo by Lester Graham)
Government-funded programs that pay for
conservation on farmland have done a lot to
improve the environment over the past twenty
years. The federal government has paid farmers
to take some cropland and set it aside to protect
waterways and wildlife habitat. In the second of
our two-part series on ethanol, Julie Grant reports
that some of that conservation is being stalled:
Transcript
Government-funded programs that pay for
conservation on farmland have done a lot to
improve the environment over the past twenty
years. The federal government has paid farmers
to take some cropland and set it aside to protect
waterways and wildlife habitat. In the second of
our two-part series on ethanol, Julie Grant reports
that some of that conservation is being stalled:
A good hard rain can wash a lot of valuable soil off a farm field.
John Wallbrown grows corn and soybeans on his farm. He says losing
soil is just like losing money. The soil carries with it all the
nutrients he’s put in the fields to help the crops grow, things such as
nitrogen and phosphorous. Wallbrown says he’s put in a good number of
grass waterways through the fields to help filter the water and hold on
to that soil:
“And so when you put in a grass waterway, it dramatically reduces the
amount of erosion. And it is just better for the water supply, better
for our crop. We’re keeping our soil in our field as opposed to it
getting put away.”
What Wallbrown calls nutrients in the field are considered pollution
once they wash into rivers and lakes. So Wallbrown says planting grass
near waterways is good for everyone. Except it means he’s got to use
land that otherwise could be growing crops, and that’s a loss of
income.
Wallbrown has gotten various government assistance to offset those
losses. The largest program, is called the Conservation Reserve Program, known as the
CRP for short.
John Johnson is with the US Department of Agriculture. He says when
you add up all the farms like John Wallbrown’s around the country, the
CRP is making a huge difference in reducing agricultural runoff into
waterways:
“Over 450 million tons of topsoil annually are prevented from eroding
because of CRP. We’ve got lots of really good benchmarks and measurements of
success of CRP, in both water quality, soil erosion and wildlife
habitat.”
But that set-aside land is in demand these days. There’s been a huge
call for bio-fuels to help reduce American dependence on foreign oil.
Bio-fuels are made from crops such as soybeans and corn, especially
corn. So Johnson says the government has decided to stop enrolling
new farmland into the conservation program:
“The overriding concern was that there is a need for a larger supply of
corn and soybeans and wheat production right now, so given the need for
that production, let’s just take a pause right now from enrolling large
acreage of additional farmland into the CRP.”
Corn is used to make ethanol, a fuel that’s now commonly blended with
gasoline. That’s caused corn prices to nearly double so farmers say
they’re planting 12 million acres more corn this year than last year.
That’s the most corn grown in the US in more than 50 years.
Ralph Grossi, director of the American Farmland Trust, says corn needs a
lot more nitrogen fertilizer than other crops. And when it rains,
nitrogen moves quickly from the fields to the waterways. That’s
especially true when grass strips don’t filter the runoff.
Grossi says that nitrogen drains into creeks and rivers from 36 states
into the Mississippi River and eventually to the Gulf of Mexico. There
it causes huge algae blooms that then die, sink, and the decaying
matter causes low oxygen in the water called hypoxia. That’s why the
Corn Belt has been blamed for creating a huge dead zone in the Gulf of
Mexico each year:
“If you increase corn production and don’t add the conservation practices
it will add nutrients and exacerbate problems in the gulf with hypoxia.
But it’s not just in the gulf, it’s problems for every local water
district that has to purify water for drinking and other urban
purposes. As they have to contend with more nutrients, that increases
their costs of cleaning the water.”
Grossi says the best place to clean the water is at the source. He
says that’s why the government must continue to help farmers pay for
grass waterways and buffer strips – those things prevent farm nutrients
from getting into the water in the first place. He says the need for
grass waters is even greater now that so much farmland is being planted
in corn to meet the demand for more ethanol.
If you plan to buy a new car or truck this
year, you might find some showrooms filled with
vehicles that run largely on ethanol instead of
gasoline. Car companies are pushing these corn-fueled vehicles as environmentally friendly.
Julie Grant takes a look at those claims:
Transcript
If you plan to buy a new car or truck this
year, you might find some showrooms filled with
vehicles that run largely on ethanol instead of
gasoline. Car companies are pushing these corn-fueled vehicles as environmentally friendly.
Julie Grant takes a look at those claims:
More people are considering buying cleaner, more fuel-efficient
cars now that gas prices and global temperatures are on the rise. The gas-
electric hybrids made by Toyota and Honda are becoming popular. And
American car companies are also jumping on board and offering alternative-
powered vehicles.
General Motors CEO Rick Wagoner has put much of his company’s stock in
ethanol:
“At GM, we believe that the bio-fuel with the greatest potential to
displace petroleum-based fuels in the US is ethanol, and so we have
made a major commitment here to vehicles that can run on E85 ethanol.”
E85 is a blend that’s 85% ethanol with 15% gasoline. GM’s not the only company offering cars that run on them:
(Sound of vehicle introduction)
Angela Hines is from Green Bay, Wisconsin. She’s taking notes as she looks at one
flex fuel car. The E85 only matters to her if it’s going to save her a
few bucks:
“I drive anywhere from 80-200 miles
a day for work, so yeah, gas is important.”
Gui Derochers is looking at a Chevy Silverado pickup truck:
(Grant:) “Does it matter to you that it’s a flex fuel?”
“I think it’s a good thing… flex-fuel. Particularly, we know there are some ethanol plants in Michigan coming, right? Isn’t
that what flex fuel is? Ethanol?”
Derochers works on engines and transmissions:
“You have to remember, I work for Daimler-Chrysler. But we have flex fuel as well. It’s a good thing. It’s wonderful.”
But not everyone thinks the move toward ethanol-fueled cars is
wonderful. Tadeusz Patzek is a professor of civil and environmental
engineering at the University of California in Berkeley. He says
ethanol is not cheaper and it’s not any better for the environment than
regular gas.
Patzek says each gallon of ethanol burned might emit less greenhouse gas
into the air, but you have to burn more fuel to go the same distance:
“So, mile for mile, emissions of CO2 are exactly the same for gasoline as
they are for ethanol. Because they are proportional to the energy stored in
the fuel.”
When it comes to gas mileage, Patzek calls claims that ethanol is any
better then gasoline an imaginary economy… and he’s not alone. When Consumer Reports magazine tested a Chevy Tahoe that runs on gas mixed
with only ten percent ethanol, the truck got 14 miles per gallon. But
it got less than 11 miles per gallon when the ethanol content was
raised to 85%, as in E85. That’s a 27% drop in fuel economy with E85.
Consumer Reports concluded that to go the same distance, you wind up paying more than a dollar
extra per gallon on E85 then on regular
gas.
Patzek says it’s not a good deal for consumers or for the environment:
“You emit less because you have oxygen but you burn more, so it comes as a wash.”
Patzek says ethanol has other environmental costs. To grow the corn needed to make it, farmers have to use more fossil fuel-based fertilizers, tractor fuel, and then more fuel to truck the fuel to gas stations.
Even so, many scientists say ethanol still provides an energy benefit over fossil fuels and some auto engineers say ethanol cars
are just a stop-gap measure until a better technology comes along, but Patzek disagrees with that logic:
“So, you’re saying the following: why don’t we have a terribly bad
solution and call it a stop-gap solution because it’s politically
convenient. I’m saying is, if I’m an engineer, I have to, essentially, if I’m honest with myself and others, do I want a
better technological solution or do I want to say, let’s do probably the worst possible solution
that delays other solutions 10-15 years into the future… while the
world is running out of time?”
Patzek says the real reason American car companies are moving toward
vehicles that run on E85 is that the federal government rewards them
for it.
GM and the others get extra credit for meeting fuel efficiency
standards just for making cars that can run on E85, even if those cars
aren’t more fuel efficient.
Patzek knows he’s become unpopular among many farmers, engineers,
scientists and politicians who want easy answers. He wants people to
start reducing their energy-use rather than waiting for technological
magic bullets.
Ethanol distillation plants are being built all over the corn belt. An environmental think tank predicts food prices will rise because corn is used for meat and many other food products. (Photo by Lester
Graham)
Corn prices have already gone up, in part due to higher demand for ethanol production. An environmental think tank believes that will translate to higher food prices. (Photo by Lester Graham)
As ethanol is becoming more common, the demand for corn is driving up prices for the grain. (Photo by Lester Graham)
There are new questions about how much grain it will take to supply all the ethanol plants being built around the U.S.
One group says more ethanol production will boost grain prices further. Chuck Quirmbach reports:
Transcript
There are new questions about how much grain it will take to supply all the ethanol plants being
built around the U.S. One group says more ethanol production will boost grain prices further.
Chuck Quirmbach reports:
The U.S. Ag department estimates the nearly 200 ethanol plants that are in production, being
expanded or being built will require 60 million tons of corn by the end of next year. But the
Earth Policy Institute says the actual need for corn will be more than twice that much.
Institute President Lester Brown says the surging demand for grain will drive up food prices.
“In a sense, our refrigerators are stuffed with corn that’s been converted into livestock products of
one sort or another, so what happens to corn prices will very much affect prices at the
supermarket checkout counter. ”
Brown says he’d like to see a moratorium on licensing new ethanol plants. But some farmers
contend they’ll be able to expand production to meet the additional demand for corn.
