Business: Are Florida ethanol plants worth it?

In its bid to halt climate change, Florida has pumped $50-million into ethanol projects in the past two years.

Florida has bet millions on unproven technology. If it works, in a decade Florida will produce enough ethanol to offset less than 2 percent of its thirst for gasoline. The state's gamble on ethanol continues, even as new research indicates that ethanol could be far worse for the planet than gasoline.

Jeremy Susac, director of Florida's Energy Office, stands behind the state's investment. He believes that the latest science is flawed and that ethanol offers deep cuts in greenhouse gas emissions. Even if ethanol turns out to be a major polluter, he'd still back it.

"Even if it's a wash, even it's just as bad as gasoline, why not stimulate production in-house?" Susac asked. "How many wars do you have to have in the Middle East before you say it's a good idea to reduce our dependence on foreign oil?"

Ethanol, an alcohol-based fuel that the United States makes largely from corn, has been hailed as the saving trinity: It will reduce greenhouse gases, save the family farm and free the country from the grip of foreign oil. In December, Congress passed sweeping energy legislation that pushes the country to use 36-billion gallons of biofuels a year by 2022. Ethanol, with more than 6.5-billion gallons produced in the United States last year, stands ready to fill the breach.

Florida has trumpeted $37.5-million in renewable-energy grants since the start of the year. More than $20-million went to ethanol. By contrast, the state put $2.6-million into wind projects and $2.4-million into solar.

Susac argues that ethanol is a prudent investment, just "one arrow amongst many in a quiver to reduce greenhouse gases and achieve energy security."

Some have divided the ethanol debate into warring camps of "uncritical lovers" against "unloving critics." If Susac lands squarely in the first camp, Mark Z. Jacobson, engineering professor at Stanford University, stands firmly in the second.

"There's no reason to think that ethanol will reduce carbon emissions," Jacobson said. "There's no legitimate study in the world that shows that."

Jacobson's own research shows that using ethanol instead of gasoline could make air quality worse. When he published his article last April, the industry quickly attacked. Ethanol backers claimed his funding came from Exxon Mobil. (It came from NASA.)

Ethanol boosters launched a barrage of counterclaims and fell back on ethanol's strongest defense: that it reduces the greenhouse gas emissions that cause climate change. The industry has long championed its feedstock crops as traps for carbon dioxide. Subtract the trapped carbon from ethanol's emissions, and the fuel gains an enormous carbon advantage over gasoline.

Susac pointed to an Argonne National Laboratory study popular among ethanol lovers that claims corn ethanol would cut greenhouse gases by up to 29 percent and cellulosic ethanol by as much as 85 percent.

But that claim suffered a double blow in February. Two new studies published in the peer-reviewed journal Science concluded that ethanol from corn could double greenhouse gases over 30 years. Cellulosic ethanol, made by unlocking the sugars in switch grass, could increase greenhouse gases by 50 percent.

The authors tried to calculate the poorly understood costs of turning America's farmland into a gas station. Left alone, land stores carbon. If we turn food crops to fuel crops, we still have to eat. That means new land will have to be cleared to grow food, releasing the carbon tucked away in its trees and grasses.

That indirect carbon penalty should count against ethanol, argued Tim Searchinger, visiting scholar at Princeton University and author of one of the studies.

"If you can count the benefit of using land that way, then you have to count the cost of using land that way," Searchinger said. "The point is that land is not free, either in terms of money or of carbon."

There's an important exception to Searchinger's equation, something he calls "the free carbon lunch": waste products.

Of the $50-million Florida has devoted to ethanol production and research, at least $13-million went to projects that will use waste such as tree trimmings and citrus peels. An additional $20-million went to a University of Florida project with Florida Crystals to make ethanol from sugar bagasse.

These waste-to-ethanol projects depend on cellulosic technology, which produces ethanol by unlocking the energy potential in complex fibers of tree trimmings or orange peels.

"One group talks about it as being at least 10 years away, and there's another group that talks as if it's ready to turn the spigot today," said Lonnie Ingram, director of the Florida Center for Renewable Chemicals and Fuel at the University of Florida. "I think it's between those two."

Ingram, 60, patented the genetically engineered bacteria that made it possible to use wood and agricultural waste to create cellulosic ethanol in the 1980s. But after gas prices dropped, so did interest in his breakthrough.

Development lagged until oil prices surged again in recent years. The long delay leaves cellulosic ethanol playing catch-up. The United States started building its first cellulosic ethanol plant last year in Louisiana. When completed, it will produce about 1.5-million gallons of ethanol each year.

Have patience, urged Jay Levenstein, deputy director of the Florida Department of Agricultural and Consumer Services. "The science has been done, and some of the work has been done. They just really haven't made that leap to commercial scale yet."

In the meantime, U.S. motorists consume more than 388-million gallons of gasoline every day.

"If you're trying to solve climate problems, biofuels don't do anything for climate, and they don't do anything for air quality," Jacobson lamented. "But other renewables do, and that's what we should be investing in."

Times researchers Carolyn Edds and Shirl Kennedy contributed to this report. Asjylyn Loder can be reached at aloder@sptimes.com or (813) 225-3117.

Share your thoughts on this story

Read our guidelines for comments

Comments on this article

by EltToro	03/04/08 01:39 AM
Explore for oil and gas in the Gulf and stop wasting our food supply on ethenol.

by Dick	03/03/08 09:20 PM
Ethanol is only a political shell game orchestrated and paid for by the greedy bloodsuckers. If you want to really do something to help the environment, look to the all electric, fuel cell or hybrid cars that get 100 MPG, stop kidding yourselves.

by JO	03/03/08 08:39 PM
There is no plant in mossy head, if you will look up the phone or contact numbers you will see this is just a scam. There is no Gulf Coast Energy of Walton LLC or in Alabama. Cris Florida's governor was robbed of 7 million on this project.

by Gary	03/03/08 05:29 PM
If the State licensed a well in the gulf, built a refinery and mandated the oil be refined there, they could take millions of profit dollars and invest it in alternative energy. Kill three birds with one stone - more gas now, no tax dollars used.

by Chris	03/03/08 05:16 PM
It takes 3 gallons of water to make 1 gallon of ethanol, it can't be transported in the same pipeline because of water solubility, is less efficient, can actually cost more than gas, & the feds subsidize every gallon with taxpayer money...wake up!

by Alan	03/03/08 05:16 PM
I work for GM and we think E85 ethanol is best near-term solution to offsetting demand for oil and reducing CO2 emissions. Criticizing biofuels is easy. How about a better option that will help today? Kudos to Florida for its biofuels research.

by jes	03/03/08 05:10 PM
Colleen, my poison would be a little more taxes and a lot more public transportation.

by Tami	03/03/08 03:15 PM
Even in Brazil, where it is highly touted, it is an environmental disaster read National Geographic!! The best way to harvest it is to burn the fields, toxins released, otherwise it is brutal on the body. The net gain is a loser.

by Disgruntled Floridian	03/03/08 02:51 PM
It seems to me that if we live in the "sunshine state" we would dump a billion dollars into solar energy. Are we not doing this because the supply cant be limited to boost prices? Seems like a waste of our money. Things that make you go DUH!!!!!

by Rose	03/03/08 01:02 PM
Desperately need wind & solar. Let's start teaching Florida HS students to manufacture, install & improve these. Create jobs & products to sell green. Why keep buying foreign solar panels like we must now? Space age state should LEAD.

by colleen	03/03/08 12:48 PM
pick your poison folks!

by George	03/03/08 12:43 PM
rip off of taxpayers--worse gas mileage

by Rich	03/03/08 11:53 AM
Everybody knows ethanol is not the answer. The pols told us it was because Iowa was the first to vote in primaries. Iowa is full of corn farmers and the price has tripled recently due to ethanol demand. They were all just pandering for the votes.

by Randy	03/03/08 11:50 AM
Susac is an idiot. Why are we going to spend money on an industry that is flawed from the outset? Also, he is definitely not a scientist so is entirely not credible about his opinion on the studies. He is just doing what his bosses told him to do.

by Mike	03/03/08 11:34 AM
I have a novel idea... lets convert dormant farm land for Ethanol production instead of eyesore housing development. Don't have to add schools, or other infastructure to support using dormant farm land for Ethanol.

by Michael	03/03/08 11:27 AM
I find fault with the premise that, "more land will have to be cleared to grow food replacing what will be used for Ethanol". For the last twenty years I have watched thousands of acres of citrus groves converted to houses for profit. Why not E-85?

by Lyn	03/02/08 08:34 PM
Where are the numbers that were published with the article in the paper on Sunday? Without them the article is incomplete and not nearly as effective. Without Etanol by the nu7mbers it loses a huge amount of effectiveness. Oh well SPT strikes agai

by JM	03/02/08 06:19 PM
The Busches are not the problem its the idiots we keep electing back to office.I don't see the democrats doing such a good job now that they control congress.Too busy spending money on useless investigations.Vote the idiots out.

by tom	03/02/08 05:32 PM
People with time and effort invested in flawed research can and will find another source of paychecks but folks generally resist and fear change.

by Jim	03/02/08 04:13 PM
A big hoax. The same companies that are hosing us for gasoline will control the price at the pump for ethanol. Ethanol uses more energy to produce than it yields as fuel for our cars. A lose-lose scenario.

by Jason	03/02/08 01:16 PM
If the ethanol is produced from sugar cane, then it is a good substitute for gasoline. If ethanol is produced from corn, then it is a wash, or slightly worse.

by Henry	03/02/08 01:13 PM
Let me reiterate comments I made and not posted. Ethanol from corn takes more power to produce than it gives, and cars running on ethanol typically give 25% less MPG than gas. Compressed air seems a more viable alternative.

by Kevin	03/02/08 12:37 PM
I recall reports indicating that production of ethanol was water-intensive and further that not even reclaimed water was usable; our fresh water is already scarce so ethanol does NOT seem like a good fit for Florida until salt water can be used.

by JR	03/02/08 11:39 AM
Modern Marvels had an episode which showed a compressed air powered car for sale in some third world country that is cheap, gets good distance per 'recharge', and is refueled by an air compressor. The electricity could come from wind, solar, etc.

by David	03/02/08 09:40 AM
Florida is making a big mistake by not allocating money to solar and wind. I figured after Barbara's other feeble-minded son left office that we would FINALLY see some spending in wind/solar, but apparently not. Ethanol IS NOT the answer here.

by JH	03/02/08 07:21 AM
Good article, we need to get our dollars out of Saudi hands. They are funding wahab mosques and terror in the west. Ethanol can also be made from kudzu. GM has invested in a company that makes ethanol and they have several e85 vehicles.

Are Florida ethanol plants worth it?

New research says ethanol is far worse for the planet than gasoline. So why is Florida spending millions to promote it?