Archive for April, 2008

Food Inflation, Riots Spark Worries for World Leaders

Thursday, April 17th, 2008

Wall Street Journal

2008-04-14

WASHINGTON — Finance ministers gathered this weekend to grapple with the global financial crisis also struggled with a problem that has plagued the world periodically since before the time of the Pharaohs: food shortages.Surging commodity prices have pushed up global food prices 83% in the past three years, according to the World Bank — putting huge stress on some of the world’s poorest nations. Even as the ministers met, Haiti’s Prime Minister Jacques Edouard Alexis was resigning after a week in which that tiny country’s capital was racked by rioting over higher prices for staples like rice and beans.

Rioting in response to soaring food prices recently has broken out in Egypt, Cameroon, Ivory Coast, Senegal and Ethiopia. In Pakistan and Thailand, army troops have been deployed to deter food theft from fields and warehouses. World Bank President Robert Zoellick warned in a recent speech that 33 countries are at risk of social upheaval because of rising food prices. Those could include Indonesia, Yemen, Ghana, Uzbekistan and the Philippines. In countries where buying food requires half to three-quarters of a poor person’s income, “there is no margin for survival,” he said.

Many policy makers at the weekend meetings of the International Monetary Fund and World Bank agreed that the problem is severe. Among other targets, they singled out U.S. policies pushing corn-based ethanol and other biofuels as deepening the woes.

“When millions of people are going hungry, it’s a crime against humanity that food should be diverted to biofuels,” said India’s finance minister, Palaniappan Chidambaram, in an interview. Turkey’s finance minister, Mehmet Simsek, said the use of food for biofuels is “appalling.”

James Connaughton, chairman of the White House’s council on environmental quality, said biofuels are only one contributor to rising food prices. Rising prices for energy and electricity also contribute, as does strong demand for food from big developing countries like China.

But beyond taking shots at the U.S., there was little agreement this weekend on what should be done. Mr. Zoellick pushed the ministers to focus on the food issue in a dramatic Thursday news conference at which he held up a 2-kilogram (4.4-pound) bag of rice, which he said would now cost poor families in Bangladesh half their daily income. He kept up the pressure over the weekend. In a Sunday news briefing, he said, “We have to put our money where our mouth is now — so that we can put food into hungry mouths.”

But the weekend’s meeting produced few concrete results. Mr. Zoellick recently urged rich nations to contribute another $500 million to the United Nation’s World Food Program, but he said that the U.N. has received commitments for only about half the money.

Integrated Response

Meanwhile, the IMF’s board of governors — basically, the world’s finance ministers, who run both the IMF and World Bank — urged the IMF to work with the World Bank for “an integrated response through policy advice and financial support.”

On Sunday, the committee that oversees the World Bank noted that “large groups of poor people are severely affected by high food and energy prices across the developing world.” The committee echoed the IMF committee’s call for “timely policy and financial support to vulnerable countries” and urged rich countries to be more generous in “immediate support for countries most affected by the high food prices.”

The World Bank plans to nearly double its agricultural lending to Africa next year to $800 million, and is urging members to ramp up relief for hard-pressed nations. The World Bank, IMF and big industrialized nations also are pushing for the completion of the Doha global trade talks, though cutting food subsidies in the U.S. and Europe under a trade deal would boost prices of food for impoverished importing nations.

Last week, British Prime Minister Gordon Brown urged the G7 nations — the U.S., Britain, Canada, France, Germany, Italy and Japan — to develop a comprehensive strategy for the food problem, encompassing trade, agricultural productivity, technology, biofuels and short-term aid for poor countries. In the past, Britain has taken the lead in pushing the G7 to write off the debts of the world’s poorest nations.

The situation in Haiti underscored some of the problems afflicting the world’s poorest countries. Haiti has enough food in the marketplace to feed its populace, but prices have increased beyond the means of many of the urban poor to pay for it, said Michael Hess, an administrator in the U.S. Agency for International Development’s Bureau for Democracy, Conflict and Humanitarian Assistance. “People are making two bucks a day,” he said. “And we’re seeing food prices go up around the world.”

Wave of Protectionism

In the Philippines, the world’s biggest importer of rice, a shortage of the grain has become acute. The government is considering a moratorium on converting agricultural land to construction of housing developments and golf courses. The government also is urging fast-food restaurants to offer half-portions of rice to slash the country’s rice bill.

Aggravating the problem, in some countries food inflation has prompted a wave of protectionism. Countries usually impose trade barriers to imports to protect local industries and try to boost exports. But food-trade protectionism works the opposite way. Recently at least a dozen of 58 countries surveyed by the World Bank have reduced tariffs to food imports and erected barriers to exports in hopes of restraining food prices domestically and moving toward “self-sufficiency.”

India, home to more than half the world’s hungry, is restricting grain exports, including a ban on the export of non-basmati rice. Taxes on edible oils, corn and butter have been decreased or eliminated.

Egypt similarly halted rice exports for six months as of April 1. The price of cereals and bread there has climbed by nearly 50% over the past 12 months. Eleven people have died in the past two months in incidents related to lengthening bread lines. The shortage compelled President Hosni Mubarak to order the army to bake additional loaves.

The global effect of export barriers, however, is to drive food prices even higher than they would be otherwise. Such policies “distort global prices,” said Mr. Simsek, the Turkish finance minister, in an interview. Rather than erect barriers, he said, Turkey plans to pick up the pace of constructing irrigation canals near dams in Anatolia, in southeastern Turkey.

Arvind Subramanian, a former senior IMF researcher, said that when countries adopt restrictive trade policies regarding food, “it becomes a bizarre kind of beggar-thy-neighbor. You’re not trying to sell more to the other guy; you’re trying to keep more in your own country.”

With the international financial institutions working on a slow track, countries have been cutting their own deals. Ukrainian President Viktor Yushchenko said on Tuesday that he had agreed to let Libya grow wheat on 247,000 acres of land in the Ukraine. In exchange, Libya promised to include the former Soviet republic in construction and gas deals.

Brazil recently invited Egypt’s minister of commerce to discuss a possible trade deal which would have a strong agriculture component. China also cut its first free-trade deal with a rich country, picking New Zealand, a major food exporter, and is talking about a pact with Australia, another big agricultural producer.

Meanwhile, Uganda plans to sell more coffee, milk and bananas to India. “Our problem is too much food and little market,” Uganda President Yoweri Kaguta Museveni told reporters, according to news reports,

About 18 of the countries sampled by the World Bank also are boosting consumer subsidies and instituting price controls. That prompted a warning from U.S. Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson to “resist the temptation of price controls and consumption subsidies that are generally not effective and efficient methods of protecting vulnerable groups.” He said, “They tend to create fiscal burdens and economic distortions while often providing aid to higher-income consumers or commercial interests other than the intended beneficiaries.”

Better-Targeted Subsidies

Instead, the World Bank’s Mr. Zoellick urged countries to look at better-targeted subsidies — such as providing food in exchange for work, or increasing school-lunch programs for poor families, so that children can take food home to their families.

During informal conversations and interviews, ministers mainly agreed that the U.S. policies on biofuels were especially harmful. U.S. ethanol is made from corn, which, ministers said, could be exported to feed the hungry, and benefited from tariffs that block Brazilian ethanol, which is produced much more efficiently from sugar cane.

The White House’s Mr. Connaughton said the U.S. is working on developing “second generation” biofuels that would use varieties of grass or agricultural wastes — not food — as source material. “That’s where we need to get to go,” he said.

The World Bank also has blamed the boom in biofuels for the rise in global food prices. That has put Mr. Zoellick in a ticklish position. Before taking his job at the World Bank, he was U.S. Trade Representative, and defended U.S. agricultural positions. In his Thursday news briefing, he didn’t mention the U.S. by name, but he praised sugar-based ethanol of the sort made in Brazil and questioned whether tariffs to block the fuel — such as the U.S. uses — make “economic sense.”

–John W. Miller in Brussels and Scott Kilman in Chicago contributed to this article.

“Anyone who can solve the problems of water

will be worthy of two Nobel prizes — one for

peace and one for science.”  John Kennedy

Ethanol Producers Sued Because Ruined Boat Fuel Tanks

Tuesday, April 15th, 2008

Gary Friedman / Los Angeles Times

Ron Tamillo of Ron’s Marine Service repairs a boat in Marina del Rey owned by Lawrence Turner. Turner has sued gasoline producers and distributors, arguing that they sold ethanol-laced gasoline at marinas without warning boaters of the additive’s harmful effect on fiberglass fuel tanks.

He says oil companies should have warned owners that the additive could cause damage. The oil companies say ethanol’s effect on fiberglass has been known for a long time.

By Elizabeth Douglass, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer
April 15, 2008

Something was wrong with Sally Ann. ¶ For months, she sputtered and choked, and Barry Treahy’s remedies weren’t working. He kept changing her fuel filters. Then he rebuilt her carburetor. Finally, he cut into her gas tank, cleaned out the mysterious caramel-colored gunk and patched her up — twice.¶ Disaster struck on a summer day in San Diego, when Treahy’s beloved 20-foot fishing boat was parked street side with the outer hull plug open to drain any residual water. The boat’s 55-gallon gas tank failed and gasoline streamed into the bilge and down the street. ¶ “I wasn’t smart enough to figure it out at first,” Treahy said of Sally Ann’s chronic troubles. Finally, he found the answer in a boating magazine. Ethanol-laced gasoline was dissolving his boat’s fiberglass fuel tank, sending bits of resin to clog filters and ultimately eating a hole all the way through the tank. ¶ Years of adding ethanol to gasoline to reduce air pollution and foreign oil dependence has had a nasty side effect: The stuff appears to damage boat fuel tanks made of fiberglass. And California is a floating testing ground for the ethanol effect.

At the beginning of 2004, all gasoline sold in the state was required to carry 5.7% ethanol as a replacement for the banned fuel additive methyl tertiary butyl ether, or MTBE, which was fouling groundwater supplies. Some boaters were unaware of the ramifications of the switch.

Lawrence Turner, stuck with more than $35,000 in ethanol-related damage to his boat, decided to fight back. Last week, the Studio City resident sued Chevron Corp., Exxon Mobil Corp. and eight other gasoline producers and distributors in U.S. District Court, arguing that the companies sold gasoline at marinas without warning boaters of ethanol’s harmful consequences.

“It caught me completely by surprise,” said Turner, whose twin-engine, semi-custom Mediterranean sport fisher named Grateful Med is still out of commission. “I figured if you went to a marine gas station and filled up your tank, you were fine to operate.”

Ethanol-blended fuel destroyed the boat’s fiberglass fuel tank, and mechanics had to cut through the hull and remove the ruined tank piece by piece. A new, aluminum tank was being installed last week. Engine repairs are still to come.

“As I reflected on the situation, I thought about the fact that there were never any warnings from the fuel companies that the product they were selling could damage the tank that it was going into,” said Turner, a 50-year-old accountant, attorney and diet company president. “What if people pulled up to their local gas station [in their cars] and all of the sudden their gas tank started dissolving?”

A Chevron spokesman said the company hadn’t seen the lawsuit and couldn’t comment. Shell Oil Co., one of the defendants in the lawsuit, Monday rejected the notion that oil companies were to blame for boat damage caused by ethanol-blended gasoline.

“There were years of advance notification that this change was coming,” and ethanol’s effect on fiberglass has been known for a long time, Shell President John Hofmeister said Monday while attending a low-carbon fuels conference in Sacramento. “Any boat owner or any boat seller or any boat maintenance shop that didn’t know about this impending change and the potential consequences simply wasn’t listening or reading.”

Turner seeks damages and restitution from the fuel companies. He also wants the case to be given class-action status so other boat owners in California could recoup the cost of ethanol-fuel-related repairs. There are nearly 950,000 pleasure boats registered in the state, but it’s unclear how many of those were built with fiberglass tanks and how many might have been damaged by ethanol-blended fuel.

Brian Kabateck, Turner’s attorney, said an expert estimated that about 10% of all the boats in California have some sort of fiberglass material used in their tanks. Repair costs could vary dramatically.

Bob Adriance, technical director for the Boat Owners Assn. of the United States, said ethanol’s dangers were widely known these days among the group’s 650,000 members. But skippers in California and New York, the first states to adopt ethanol-blended gasoline, had to figure it out themselves.

“They really got hammered because they didn’t know anything. They just suddenly had filters being clogged, and then, some people not only had to replace their fiberglass tanks, they also had to replace engines,” Adriance said. “It can cost tens of thousands of dollars — more than the boat’s worth in many cases.”

Adriance said they also were the first to suffer from ethanol’s other effects, including its tendency to scour a fuel tank of gums, resins and debris, carrying the gunk into fuel filters. Ethanol also attracts water, and over time, water-laden ethanol can separate from the rest of the gasoline, wreaking havoc with the engine.

Those problems require boaters to make adjustments, but they are manageable, said Adriance, who also edits Seaworthy, a publication by sister organization BoatUS Marine Insurance. He said newer boats had ethanol-tolerant fiberglass tanks and other components, but older boats with certain types of fiberglass tanks, rubber seals, hoses and gaskets and the like could be severely damaged by ethanol-laced fuel.

California’s Air Resources Board, the agency that shepherded the switch from MTBE to ethanol as a fuel additive, was surprised to hear that boats had been damaged by the state’s 5.7% ethanol fuel blend, which is well below the 10% blends common elsewhere in the country.

“If this reported case is with a California boat that was using California fuel, this would be the first that I’ve heard of it,” agency official Jim Guthrie said.

He asked boaters to notify the air board of any problems, especially because California plans to raise the ethanol component in gasoline to 10%.

“To my mind, the state isn’t in a position to know about all of the effects,” said Adriance of BoatUS.

As for the lawsuit against oil companies, though, “it seems to me that they have a legitimate point,” Adriance said. “Nobody told the boat owners. The oil companies or somebody ought to have warned them.”

elizabeth.douglass@

latimes.com

Ethanol Gas Mileage An Issue

Tuesday, April 8th, 2008

By Kate Ramsayer / The Bulletin

Published: April 03. 2008 4:00AM PST

When Maren Craig drove her Prius to Portland in late January, she didn’t pay much attention to the fuel mileage her hybrid car was getting. The computerized display on her dashboard showed somewhere between 50 and 55 miles per gallon, typical for her highway mileage, said the Bend resident.

In Portland, she filled up, noticing the station carried a blend of gasoline and 10 percent ethanol, and then headed south on I-5 toward Medford.

Along the way, her gas mileage dropped more than 20 percent.

“I got 38.9 miles to the gallon,” she said. “I was just horrified. I thought something must be wrong with my car. That had never happened before.”

As Oregon makes the shift to a blend of ethanol in gas tanks this year, some are concerned about what the mixture will do to fuel efficiency. There are a range of estimates for how ethanol will affect the number of trips to the pump. While some drivers have noticed large differences, scientists with a Department of Energy laboratory say the effect should be minimal, and others say the impact is still uncertain.

By the end of the year, automobile fuel across Oregon is required to contain a 10 percent mix of ethanol, according to legislation passed in 2007 designed to promote renewable energy. Central Oregon’s deadline to convert to the blend is mid-September, although the E10 mix is now in some local gas stations.

New legislation exempts crafts such as airplanes, boats and classic cars from the blended ethanol and gasoline rules.

A gamut of numbers

At the measurement standards division of the Oregon Department of Agriculture, Clark Cooney has heard the gamut of numbers relating to how large an effect ethanol has on gas mileage.

He has read studies that say the E10 mix will decrease the fuel efficiency of a car by 2 percent to 3 percent. He has read it will drop the miles per gallon by 10 percent to 12 percent. He has heard from people who call in saying their mileage has dropped by 30 percent to 35 percent.

That extreme is probably something wrong with the particular vehicle, he said.

But a car’s mileage does drop some by adding ethanol to fuel. What that impact is isn’t certain, Cooney said, and could take some time to figure out.

“It tends to be very polarized,” he said of the issue of ethanol mixes. “People are either for it or against, and both sides seem to have studies to support their point of view. … Studies seem to be done all the time, and each study seems to be different.”

One study from the American Coalition for Ethanol tested three cars and found that, on average, the miles per gallon decreased from 27.99 with regular unleaded gasoline to 27.58 with a 10 percent ethanol blend, a 1.5 percent difference.

Ethanol burns differently than gasoline, said Andy Aden, a senior research engineer with the National Renewable Energy Laboratory, which is under the U.S. Department of Energy. But the difference shouldn’t be noticeable in a 10 percent ethanol mix.

“A gallon of gasoline compared to a gallon of ethanol is roughly a 30 percent difference” in energy content, Aden said. But since only a tenth of the mix is ethanol, that E10 blend only has a 3 percent difference in energy content, he said.

“At the more concentrated E85 levels, which contain 85 percent ethanol, it’s a little bit of a concern,” he said. “But at the 10 percent level, it’s absolutely not a concern.”

More mileage could be lost by things such as how tires are inflated, Aden said. And cities like Denver, where the laboratory is located, have been using the E10 blend for years; Portland has been using E10 during the winter for years.

Ethanol has less energy because of its chemical properties, he said. In gasoline, there are lots of bonds between carbon atoms, and when gasoline is burned, those bonds release more energy than the bonds in ethanol. Ethanol only has one carbon-carbon bond, and includes a carbon-oxygen bond as well.

Because of this oxygen bond, ethanol also has more of a complete combustion, meaning the particle breaks up until it’s only water and carbon dioxide, as opposed to when gasoline is burned, which results in carbon monoxide and other compounds.

And that’s one of the benefits of ethanol, Cooney said.

“The 10 percent blended gasoline does burn cleaner, there’s less of the pollutants,” he said — that’s why it has been a requirement for Portland winters since the early 1990s. Some brands of gasoline, such as Arco, have had blended fuel for years.

“People may have been using 10 percent ethanol for some time,” Cooney said.

Although the rules passed by the Legislature last year don’t require Central Oregon to use E10 until mid-September, the blend is now in some local gas stations, and could become even more prevalent soon.

That’s because Central Oregon gets much of its gasoline from Portland and Eugene sources. While Portland has made the switch, Eugene will make it this month, so, practically speaking, Bend’s gas will be blended as well, Cooney said.

Questioning the source

Beyond the questions of mileage and emissions, some are concerned about ethanol because of its source. The ethanol blended into gasoline is derived from corn.

“The more I found out about ethanol, the more I realized this is a terrible solution to this problem,” said Dennis Douglas, of Bend. “It doesn’t do any of the things that the promoters claim.”

As a member of the Experimental Aircraft Association, he became interested in the issue as it relates to airplane fuel, but started looking further into the issue, he said.

It doesn’t save fossil fuels because of the requirements for producing ethanol, he said, and causes the cost of food to go up.

“When you look at how little of our land base is really suitable for high agricultural production, it doesn’t make sense to be using our best farmland to be growing food for cars instead of food for people,” said Cylvia Hayes, the executive director of the Bend-based nonprofit 3EStrategies, which promotes sustainability.

Growing corn for fuel is an energy-intensive process in itself, she said, with the growing of corn, fertilizing land, mass harvesting and processing operations.

One idea that people are working on, however, is cellulosic ethanol — made from things such as woody biomass, corn husks, stock left over from wheat and other leftover plant products.

“When we crack that, that’s going to be a huge solution,” Hayes said.

There’s no mass production of cellulosic ethanol at the moment, Aden said, but that could change shortly. Construction has started for some ethanol production facilities, and they could be producing the new type of ethanol within a few years.

Kate Ramsayer can be reached at 617-7811 or kramsayer@bendbulletin.com.

Corn Hits $6.00 a Bushel Ethanol Profits Gone

Saturday, April 5th, 2008

Corn Hits $6 a Bushel on Tight Supplies
Thursday April 3, 6:56 pm ET
By Stevenson Jacobs, AP Business Writer

 

Corn Prices Jump to Record $6 a Bushel, Driving Up Costs for Food, Alternative Energy NEW YORK (AP) — Corn prices jumped to a record $6 a bushel Thursday, driven up by an expected supply shortfall that will only add to Americans’ growing grocery bill and further squeeze struggling ethanol producers.Corn prices have shot up nearly 30 percent this year amid dwindling stockpiles and surging demand for the grain used to feed livestock and make alternative fuels including ethanol. Prices are poised to go even higher after the U.S. government this week predicted that American farmers — the world’s biggest corn producers — will plant sharply less of the crop in 2008 compared to last year.“It’s a demand-driven market and we may not be planting enough acres to supply demand, so that adds to the bullishness of corn,” said Elaine Kub, a grains analyst with DTN in Omaha, Neb.Corn for the most actively traded May contract rose 4.25 cents to settle at $6 a bushel on the Chicago Board of Trade, after earlier rising to $6.025 a bushel — a new all-time high.Worldwide demand for corn to feed livestock and to make biofuel is putting enormous pressure on global supply. And with the U.S. expected to plant less corn, the supply shortage will only worsen. The U.S. Department of Agriculture projected that farmers will plant 86 million acres of corn in 2008, an 8 percent drop from last year.Moreover, cold, wet weather in parts of the U.S. corn belt may force farmers to delay spring planting, potentially sending prices even higher.While corn growers are reaping record profits, U.S. consumers can expect even higher grocery bills — especially for meat and pork — as livestock producers are forced to pass on higher animal feed costs and thin their herd size.“Higher corn prices is going to affect meat prices. If you’re feeding with $6 corn, you’ll definitely have some (cost) pressure,” Kub said.In addition, corn and corn syrup are used in an array of products, meaning the price of everything from candy to soft drinks will eventually go up, analysts say. It’s the latest dose of bad news for U.S. consumers, who are already struggling with higher food costs from record increases in the price of wheat, soybeans and other agriculture products.Another loser in higher corn costs is ethanol producers, who are struggling to squeeze out gains as corn’s record-setting run outpaces the price of ethanol, currently at around $2.50 a gallon.“For years, corn was cheap and fermentation processes for ethanol production came to completely dominate the biofuel industry in North America,” Michael Jackson, president and chairman of Vancouver-based ethanol maker Syntec Biofuel, said this week. “Now, with corn prices well over $5 a bushel, corn ethanol economics have gone out the window.”The nation’s 147 ethanol plants now have the capacity to produce 8.5 billion gallons of fuel a year, according to the Renewable Fuels Association. Corn is the basic feedstock for most of the plants and about 20 percent of last year’s 13 billion bushel corn crop was consumed by ethanol production. That percentage is expected to increase to 30 percent for the next crop year, which ends Aug. 31, 2009, according to Terry Francl, a senior economist for the American Farm Bureau Federation.There are still plans to build or expand another 61 plants, which will add about 5.1 billion gallons of capacity. However, as corn prices have climbed over the past year or so, construction of several plants has been halted or delayed, shaving about 500 million gallons worth of capacity off the original figure, according to Broadpoint Capital analyst Ron Oster.At least one facility, the Alchem plant in Grafton, N.D., shut down late last year because of high prices.A new plant hasn’t broken ground over the past couple of quarters, Oster said, and while producers can have positive gross margins with ethanol at $2.50 a gallon and corn at $6 a bushel, that doesn’t mean companies are profitable.“Bottom line earnings are near break-even or modestly below break-even,” he said.Looking ahead, only the strongest ethanol producers will survive in an era of ever-rising corn prices, said Soleil Securities analyst Ian Horowitz.“There are going to be some particular companies that definitely have the balance sheet and efficiencies that will be able to eke out a positive return in this kind of environment,” Horowitz said. “And then there will be others that will suffer at the hands of $6 corn.”Associated Press Business Writer Lauren LaCapra contributed to this report. 

ETHANOL – The Clean Energy Scam

Wednesday, April 2nd, 2008

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1725975,00.html

MPCA Orders First EIS Review Of Proposed Ethanol Plant

Wednesday, April 2nd, 2008

http://www.minnpost.com/stories/2008/03/28/1304/mpca_orders_first_full_impac