|
Archives
Why I Don't Write About Biofuelsby John J. Fanning
On more than a few occasions, people have asked me why I don’t write
more about biofuels. On the face of it, you would think that someone writing
in the
Chief Engineer Magazine would readily tackle such a subject. It is certainly
the hottest topic in the energy industry. Along with addressing global warming
- which, in no small part fuels the biofuel industry (no pun intended) - biofuel
is, and will continue to be, both a major topic and policy initiative in the
United States.
Well, the reason I avoid writing about it - to put it both briefly and bluntly
- is because biofuel production in the United States is so sullied by politics
and greed that every time I consider writing about it, I feel the need
to take a hot shower just to cleanse myself of the disgust I feel from pondering
the topic.
Biofuel and renewable energy is not only a way to diminish our dependence
upon imported fossil fuels; it is also the answer to lowering carbon emissions
in
the United States. But the truth is, the powers that be in this country have
no desire to diminish the use of fossil fuels and they really don’t
give a damn about cleaning up the environment. And if you, or anyone else
has any
doubt about that statement, you need only look at our history and policies
regarding biofuel.
Biofuel is not new. It has been around longer than fossil fuels. The first
modern internal combustion engine was designed to run on biofuel. The first
Diesel was designed to run on biofuel. And Henry Ford developed the Model
T to run on biofuel. Ford also developed a methanol production plant in
Iron Mountain, Michigan and contracted with Standard Oil to distribute methanol
at their stations in the United States. Ford and nearly every other engine
manufacturer was convinced that fossil fuel was the wrong direction for
the
country and the world. Ford was absolutely convinced that biofuel would
be the only fuel used in automobiles.
When the Model T first went into production, biofuel was produced from cellulose-based
plants. Specifically, the plant was hemp. Yes - HEMP - as in Cannabis Sativa.
The hemp that Ford and everyone else used was
not marijuana, but a cousin of that plant that has a low recreational value.
You can’t get high from industrial hemp. Hemp has been used for production
of goods for at least 6,000 years. In ancient China, it was used for paper
production. Paper made from hemp is much better than paper produced from
wood pulp. It is still used today for the making of currency because of its
durability.
Hemp oil was also used throughout the world for lighting in lamps and as
a lubricant. Sails on the ships that came and went from U.S. ports were made
from hemp as was clothing and countless other products.
If we look at agricultural crops for the production of biofuel in the U.S.,
we find that hemp is one of the best cellulose based crops that can be cultivated
here and has the potential to actually do everything we want a biofuel to do.
In the conversion of hemp to a biofuel, methanol is produced. In 1985, the
consulting firm, Stone and Webster, found that methanol from wood could be
produced in the U.S. and be competitive at a cost of $0.70 to $1.11 per gallon.
One can only imagine how much less the cost at the pump could be with methanol
produced from hemp.
Corn-based ethanol, which we produce today, has a greenhouse gas reduction
factor of 0 to 3 percent. Sugarcane based biofuel has a greenhouse gas reduction
factor of 50 to 70 percent. Cellulose based biofuel
(hemp) has a greenhouse gas
reduction factor of 90
percent.
Hemp also produces approximately 10
times more methanol per
hectare grown than corn.
It needs less fertilizer and pesticides to cultivate and it produces approximately
10 tons of biomass per acre, every four months. Hemp also absorbs carbon dioxide
during growth, thus increasing its environmental value.
About 135 ethanol plants are now in operation throughout the U.S., consuming
close to 1.6 billion bushels of grain - about 15 percent of the total corn
production. To feed the ethanol demand, farmers planted almost 93 million acres
of corn in 2007, a 19 percent increase over 2006 and the most since 1944. It
takes approximately 7 gallons of fossil fuel to produce 10 gallons of corn-based
ethanol. To end our dependence on foreign oil by using corn-based ethanol,
it is estimated that 95 percent of all American farmland would have to be given
over to producing corn. As cropland is given over to the production of corn,
the price of other agricultural products increase. It’s simply a matter
of supply and demand.
In 1938, Popular Mechanics Magazine published an article, which pronounced
hemp the United States crop of the future. According to the article, hemp
had over 250,000 commercial uses and was worth $1 billion a year to U.S. farmers.
The article cited various uses for hemp, including food products, clothing,
paper, insulation and medicine.
If hemp is so superior as a biofuel to every other crop producible in the
United States, then why are we using corn and not hemp? To answer that,
you have to
look at some rich and powerful people.
The oil companies in the
United States did not want biofuel
in the cars of America. And William Randolph Hearst, the newspaper publishing
king and owner of 800 thousand acres of forest, didn’t want hemp being
used for paper. Hemp produced paper can last for thousands of years and is
100 percent recyclable, unlike wood produced recycled paper, which requires
that virgin lumber be used in the mix to produce.
In 1921, President Warren G. Harding appointed Andrew Mellon, the American
banker and industrialist (founder of Gulf Oil and primary financial backer
of Dupont, Corp.), to the post of Secretary of Treasury. He would remain in
that position until 1932, continuing to serve under Presidents Coolidge and
Hoover. During the 1930’s, Dupont Corporation patented processes to manufacture
paper from trees and plastic and other synthetic materials from fossil fuel.
But hemp was cheaper and better for the manufacture of many of these products.
So a decision was made to destroy hemp cultivation in the U.S.
In 1930, Mellon formed the Federal Bureau of Narcotics as a branch of the
Treasury. He appointed Harry Jacob Anslinger, his nephew-in-law, to head the
new bureau.
It was a position Anslinger would hold for the next 32 years. Working with
the Hearst newspapers that coined the name “marijuana” to capitalize
on Hispanic prejudice, they produced films and false news stories telling of
the terror and horror of cannabis. Under the weight of this disinformation
and intensive lobbying by big oil,
in 1937 Congress levied taxes on hemp that made its cultivation uneconomical
for American farmers.
That same year, in Dupont’s annual report to stockholders, it was stated: “...the
revenue-raising power of government may be converted into an instrument for
forcing acceptance of sudden new ideas of industrial and social reorganization.”
Now that’s what I call - In your face!
Dupont made billions on its patents and Hearst made millions from cutting
down forests. Understandably, hemp growers went bankrupt. With the exception
of
a period during World War II when the country found itself in desperate need
of hemp and offered incentives to farmers to grow the plant, hemp died a forced,
economic death.
Because gasoline has lower octane than methanol and ethanol, automobiles
running on gasoline instead of biofuel suffered from engine knock. General
Motors Corporation
approached Standard Oil (ESSO) with the problem. Together, the two companies
came up with the idea of adding tetraethyl lead to gasoline. It was well known
at the time that lead was highly toxic. It was also known that if biofuel were
added to gasoline, the knock problem would be solved. But the two companies
realized they could not patent a formula that simply used a mixture of gasoline
and ethanol. In 1923, they formed Ethyl Corporation and under patent, produced
the gasoline additive. Tetraethyl lead remained as an additive in gasoline
until it was eventually banned in the U.S. on January
1, 1996.
In 1985, the U.S. EPA
estimated that 5,000
Americans died each
year from exposure to
tetraethyl lead in gasoline. To date, there
has never been a documented incident of a fatality from the use of hemp - includ-
ing its more powerful cousin - marijuana.
According to researchers, to arrive at a lethal dose for marijuana, the average
person would have to ingest 1,500 lbs. - all at once. If you think that’s
ironic, in 1975 researchers at the Medical College of Virginia discovered that
cannabis reduces the size of many types of tumors, both benign and cancerous.
That would include tumors caused by lead and other emissions produced by fossil
fuels.
Today, hemp production in the United States is still blockaded by the federal
government. The timber industry does not want hemp cultivated. The pharmaceutical
industry does not want hemp cultivated. The oil industry does not want hemp
cultivated. The liquor industry does not want hemp cultivated. The agricultural
industry does not want hemp cultivated and the chemical industry does not want
hemp cultivated. I could go on, but you get the point.
In 1970, Congress passed the Controlled Substance Act, which requires that
a permit be issued by the DEA before anyone can cultivate hemp in the U.S.
The DEA has made restrictions on cultivation so difficult, it is not possible
for farmers to obtain these permits. As a consequence, no agricultural hemp
cultivation has taken place in the U.S. since 1958. The DEA has continued to
fight not only the cultivation of hemp, but for years fought to prevent importation
of products manufactured from hemp. Many states have not only lifted bans on
cultivation hemp, they are actively encouraging farmers to produce the crop.
But farmers are understandably reluctant to grow the crop for fear that the
DEA will seize their property. Lawsuits filed against DEA by farmers and supported
by state politicians are presently pending in federal courts.
China is the largest producer of hemp and most hemp fabrics found in the
United States are imported from there. China is not the only country cultivating
hemp.
Many countries allow hemp cultivation. Closer to home, Canada cultivates hemp
and exports its hemp produced products to the United States. Today, you can
import hemp and hemp products into the United States, but you cannot cultivate
it. It is a situation that one federal judge has termed “asinine”.
Corn produced for biofuel has produced windfall profits for major corporations
in the United States. ADM, the giant international agribusiness and largest
producer of ethanol, holds the patent on a number of genetically altered corn
seeds. According to author and analyst, James Bovard, for every dollar that
ADM makes in profit, the U.S. taxpayer pays $30 in subsidies. To be fair, ADM
doesn’t pocket all of their profits. According to Open Secrets, since
1990 they have given nearly $8 million in contributions to U.S. politicians.
Corn-based biofuel will not ease America’s dependency on foreign oil.
It will not decrease greenhouse gas emissions. It will however, increase the
cost to consumers for beef and food products that rely on corn. According to
Jack Herer, author of The Emperor Wears No Clothes, if just six percent of
the arable land in the United States was used for hemp cultivation, we could
eliminate the need for all imported oil into this country.
With the use of hemp, we could extract 10 tons of biofuel per acre and produce
paper, rope, textiles, medicines, cosmetics and a host of other products. The
Midwest, which has been devastated by factory closings and job loss, could
experience an unprecedented renaissance with development of new factories and
jobs employing thousands of workers in hundreds of hemp derived processes.
But that is not going to happen. And the reason is because the “right” people
are not going to make money on hemp cultivation in the United States. The “right” people
will actually lose money. And you and I, and the unemployed factory worker,
and the poor, sodbuster here in the Midwest - well, we’re just not the “right” people.
I doubt that hemp cultivation will every be permitted in the United States.
I believe that the million souls rotting away in our prisons for simply possessing
cannabis will be joined by a million more, and a million more after that. The
DEA will continue its real mission, which is not to eradicate drugs in America,
but to economically regulate the drug markets for the benefit of the right
people. Congress will continue its real mission, which is not to serve the
people, but to serve the right people. And the forests will fall and the earth
will be scorched and we will all choke on the very air we breath until the
last drop of oil is yanked from the ground and sold at a profit to the highest
bidder.
And so dear readers, this is why I don’t write that often about biofuel
production in this column. I simply can’t stomach thinking about it.
Archives
|
