WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The Environmental Protection Agency on Thursday said it was extending the comment period on a draft rule that aims to cut greenhouse gases emitted by biofuels.

The proposed changes to the 2007 U.S. Renewable Fuel Standard attempt to make production of corn-based ethanol more efficient and increase output of advanced biofuels.

The comment period on the rule, also known as RFS2, will now end on September 25 instead of July 27.

"With the 60-day comment period extension, EPA seeks to provide the public adequate time to provide meaningful comment while finalizing and implementing the standards in a timely manner," the agency said.

Critics of corn ethanol have blamed the fuel for increasing food prices and indirectly causing greenhouse gas emissions by forcing forests and other lands to be burned abroad to create farmland.

The draft rule would measure any carbon dioxide emissions from these "indirect land use changes." Many corn ethanol producers strongly oppose these measurements, saying that land use estimates are untested and vary widely.

"With the extension, we urge the EPA to be fully transparent and release all data used to model the indirect land use change component so that stakeholders can review and comment on this important provision," said Tom Buis, chief executive of pro-ethanol trade group Growth Energy.

The climate bill recently passed by the House of Representatives included an amendment that would prohibit the EPA from implementing this rule for five years during a study of indirect land use change.

Under this bill, the EPA rule could then take effect only if three federal agencies agree and Congress could intervene to block a rule.

The current renewable standard required 9 billion gallons of renewable fuels such as ethanol to be blended into the nation's gasoline supply last year. The mandate, rising annually, will reach 36 billion gallons in 2022.

By ALLISON WINTER, ClimateWire

The Agriculture Department will have the lead role in overseeing agriculture offsets under the House climate bill, a major victory for farm groups that pushed lawmakers to take the lead away from U.S. EPA and a defeat for environmental groups that fear the agriculture agency may be too lax in oversight.

As part of the agreement reached last night, House Energy and Commerce Chairman Henry Waxman (D-Calif.) agreed to shift agency oversight for carbon offset programs, projects that would indirectly cut emissions of heat-trapping gases.

The deal puts USDA in charge of programs that would pay farmers and other landowners to conduct the environmentally friendly projects. Waxman said he would seek guidance from the Obama administration to figure out "an appropriate role" for EPA to play in the program.

The offset programs and the federal officials in charge of them could play a significant role in shaping implementation of the massive climate plan on the American landscape. The domestic offset market will be worth $4 billion per year through 2030, according to an EPA analysis released yesterday.

The agreement clears what had been a major sticking point in negotiations on the bill and sides with the position agriculture and farmland conservation groups have been pushing heavily for the past few weeks.

Originally, Waxman's committee put EPA in charge of the program, with the option to work with other federal agencies. But House Agriculture Chairman Collin Peterson (D-Minn.) insisted on giving oversight of the program to USDA -- an issue that both chairmen said proved to be a major sticking point over the past several weeks of negotiations.

"We had a disagreement about who ought to run the program," Waxman told reporters yesterday.

"A lot of the work we did was getting this offset program so it would work," Peterson said last night, after announcing the deal. "Energy and Commerce and EPA did not get what farmers do."

Peterson has insisted that USDA has a better understanding of farmland issues and is better equipped to implement the program, with tens of thousands of employees already involved in monitoring farmland conservation and researchers already studying carbon sequestration.

"That is why we held so firm on that," Peterson told reporters last night. "We really believe that the ag people are the ones that know the most about this and are the ones that should do this."

Waxman concedes

The question of how to deal with offsets has been a controversial one. The bill allows regulated industries that cannot meet the greenhouse gas reductions at the smokestack to buy offset credits by investing in green energy or greenhouse gas reduction projects. The provision could significantly reduce compliance costs for some industries.

It could also be a boon to farmers and other landowners who plant extra trees to absorb carbon dioxide, install methane capture systems over animal waste lagoons or practice no-till farming to store carbon in the soil.

Waxman originally wanted to give oversight of the program to EPA, a setup that won the backing of many environmental groups. Environmental groups have said EPA -- with its strong regulatory and scientific focus -- is best suited for the task of carbon oversight. Those advocates argue that USDA is not a regulatory agency and is unlikely to crack down on questionable offset projects. They say EPA is more likely to stand up against fraud.

In announcing the deal last night, Waxman said that although they disagreed at first, his staff agreed to the compromise plan over the weekend. He said the offset program would still be sound under USDA's oversight.

"The offset program is very important because it will allow reductions in CO2 in the most cost-effective way," Waxman said. "To be sure there are genuine offsets."

Waxman said yesterday that he has not spoken to environmentalists about the USDA offset oversight, but he said staff have been keeping them informed. He didn't think this agreement, or others reached with Peterson, would siphon away green groups' support. "I think we will hold the environmentalists," Waxman said.

Anna Aurilio, director of the Washington office of the group Environment America, said that while she had not seen the details, she believes EPA should play a major role in ensuring that agricultural offsets indeed help reduce emissions.

"Our basic take is whatever deal happens on this bill, EPA has to be in charge of the pollution reductions, EPA has to be the bottom line to making sure we reduce pollution to the levels the science says are necessary to avoid catastrophic climate change," she said. "A ton of offsets must represent a ton of avoided emissions."

Dan Weiss, the director of climate strategy for the liberal Center for American Progress, said "the critical thing is to make sure offsets are verifiable, additional and permanent and that EPA has an important role to play to ensure that happens."

A victory for farm groups

Farm groups won the day yesterday with their insistence that USDA should oversee the program. Farmers were skittish about giving the program to EPA, an agency that Peterson has called "foolish" and "ideological," and argued USDA was better situated to implement the program.

"We think USDA is better positioned ... a lot of farmers are really comfortable with USDA, they work with the local Farm Service Agency offices quite a bit," said Liz Friedlander of the National Farmers Union. "USDA has offices in nearly every county, while EPA does not even have an office in every state -- it is much more accessible to producers."

The farmers union and other major farm groups put USDA oversight as one of their top priorities when listing their concerns over the bill to the House Agriculture Committee and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.). The NFU has long been an advocate of cap-and-trade programs and started its own registry of farmers to participate in voluntary offset markets on the Chicago Climate Exchange. But the group said last week it would oppose the Waxman bill unless USDA was given a greater oversight role.

"There's a distrust that a lot of people in the farm country have about the role of EPA," Waxman told reporters last week. "And we've got to figure out a way so that everyone feels comfortable with the definition of an offset, the scientific validity of it, and the authenticity of it so the whole program will work."

The climate bill considered briefly in the Senate last year included language requiring that the same project could be verified by three separate investigators.

The issue of what agency should oversee the program is more than just a jurisdictional tug-of-war for agriculture and farmland conservation groups. They argue that with its extensive network of agents in the field that already have farmers' trust, USDA is set up to launch offset programs.

USDA distributes billions of dollars each year in payments or cost-share assistance for landowners to restore wetlands, idle fields, install stream buffers, enrich wildlife habitat or manage waste. And the agency created two special climate offices that have begun their own programs, such as an online calculator for farmers to figure potential carbon sequestration benefits.

Some advocates for farmland conservation programs say that USDA's work in the field and its relationships with farmers could make the difference in actually getting a carbon offset program off the ground.

"If the objective is to sequester carbon and turn around the situation on the planet, if that is the objective ... then we have to get practical, and one of the practical things is to encourage that behavior," said Dennis Nuxoll, director of government relations for American Farmland Trust, a nonprofit that advocates for farmland-protection programs. "We have got to have people that farmers trust, in all honesty, that is the U.S. Department of Agriculture, not the Environmental Protection Agency."

Nuxoll added: "If the objective is to sequester as much carbon as quickly as we possibly can, we need to let USDA deal with this and not make the perfect the enemy of the good."

USDA manpower

As far as manpower in farm states, USDA far exceeds EPA. The agency already has more than 25,000 employees with years of experience working out in the field with millions of landowners to implement different conservation and commodity programs.

Meanwhile, EPA's staffing is much smaller. EPA's work force numbers about 17,000 total employees, almost a third of whom are in the agency headquarters in Washington, D.C.

In his testimony on the climate bill earlier this month, Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack said that USDA's "extensive networks and infrastructure" to implement commodity and conservation programs could help lay the groundwork for carbon offset programs.

"Our experience with these programs provides a platform that could be used to help bring an offsets program to scale," Vilsack told the House Agriculture Committee. "In particular, existing USDA programs and systems could be used to bolster the greenhouse gas mitigation market."

The Natural Resources Conservation Service, the branch of USDA that oversees most farmland conservation programs, has offices in every state with about 11,000 employees out in the field. The field offices help landowners develop conservation plans and qualify for various federal programs that assist efforts to improve the environmental quality on farm and ranchland. NRCS has another 450 employees at USDA headquarters in Washington and the agency's research facility in Maryland.

And the Farm Service Agency -- which oversees the nation's largest land retirement program along with various crop subsidy programs -- has about 15,000 employees, 540 of whom are based in Washington, D.C., according to an agency spokesman.

"EPA is not going to hire another 30,000 to 40,000 employees, I don't think," said American Farmland Trust's Nuxoll. "It would take them a very long time to get up to speed and get enough personnel on the ground. ... [I]t is very clear to me that USDA is going to run this program day to day, no matter what."

A spotty record

But USDA's record of overseeing and implementing the programs is not spotless. Congressional and federal investigators have found major flaws with distribution and oversight of conservation contracts in three separate reports in the past year.

In particular, the department's conservation agency "routinely ignored" compliance standards when giving out wetlands and wildlife grants, an investigator for the House Agriculture Committee found. The Government Accountability Office said there is potential for duplicative payments with the conservation programs, allowing the agency to release billions of dollars in payments to landowners who do not deserve them.

Another assessment from the USDA inspector general found shoddy accounting at the Natural Resources Conservation Service. The agency was unable to provide sufficient information on transactions and account balances.

The new head of the NRCS, Dave White, has pledged to clean up the program and "move aggressively" to review all agency transactions. He has implemented a massive corrective action plan.

Despite those concerns, farm groups insist the agency is better equipped, since it at least has years of experience in trying to set up similar programs.

Senior reporters Darren Samuelsohn and Ben Geman contributed.

Copyright 2009 E&E Publishing. All Rights Reserved.

For more news on energy and the environment, visit www.climatewire.net.

Monday, June 29 at 1:00 p.m. speaker presentations begin with the session “Barley as a Fuel Feedstock”. Presenters will include Craig Shealy of Osage Bio Energy in Glen Allen VA; Clifford Bradley, Montana Microbial Products, Butte, and Tom Blake, MSU Research Professor. This will be followed by Biofuel Projects, Opportunities & Challenges with William Hagy, Under Secretary for Rural Development, USDA, Washington DC; John Urbanchuk, Economist, LECG, Pennsylvania. Yellowstone National Park Ranger, Jim Evanoff will then speak to Fuel Performance, Park use of Biofuels and the Clean Cities Program.

Tuesday July 30, the conference includes sessions that build on research and development of the innovative use of distillers grains. Presentations will expand discussion of distillers grains for medical and food use that was presented at the 2008 conference as well as present additional research currently being done on the beneficial value of biofuels coproducts. A biodiesel fuel session will follow with presentations from Joe Jobe, Executive Director of the National Biodiesel Board, and Camelina for Biodiesel with Alice Pilgeram, MSU Researcher and Biofuel Impact and Update for Montana by Howard Haines, MT DEQ.

The final conference session is on the Future with presentations on Biomass Energy through Anaerobic Digester, Algae Biofuel, Conversion and Advanced harvest and Collection of Biomass and Advanced Integrated Biofuels with animal production.
With its tightly focused agenda, this one and a half day conference is intended for anyone with an interest in this new and rapidly expanding energy industry; including: biofuel producers, marketers and retailers; end users; research institutions; farmers, ranchers and agribusiness executives, academic; private equity firms, venture capitalists, lenders and financial institutions and individual entrepreneurs.

Conference sponsors include Abengoa Bioenergy, CHS, Fagen, Inc. KATZEN International, National Biodiesel Board, Montana Department of Environmental Quality , Montana Wheat & Barley committee and ‘ Prime Biosolutions.

For additional information and/or to register the 19th Annual EPAC Biofuel Conference; call 785-3722 or visit www.ethanolmt.org today.

8:00 AM– 12:00 NOON
Vendor Trade Show booth setup Madison/Lewis

8:30 – 11:00
EPAC Board and Membership meeting, Annual Report and Election of Board –

10:30 am - 6:00 pm Registration – Foyer

1:00 PM Welcome – Senator Jon TESTER (invited) Hyalite/Clark room

1:30 KEYNOTE ADDRESS,
“Current Issues, From the Beltway”
Growth Energy

2:00 Session, Barley as a Fuel Feedstock
Moderator, Mel Goffena, Montana Wheat and Barley Committee

2:00 – 2:25 “The Possibilities for Barley to Ethanol”
Craig Shealy, CEO Osage Bio Energy LLC, Glen Allen VA

2:25 – 2:50 "Ethanol: Matching the Project to the Local Resource”
Clifford Bradley, Montana Microbial Products

2:50 – 3:15 “Barley in Montana” - Acres and varieties available
Tom Blake, MSU Bozeman

3:15 – 3:45 Break, Featuring Snacks made with Distillers Grains, Madison/Lewis

3:45 Session: “Biofuels Projects, Opportunities & Challenges”
Moderator, Linda Nielsen EPAC Board member

3:45 – 4:10 “Funding and the Farm Bill”
William Hagy, Under Secretary for Rural Development, USDA, Washington DC

4:10 -4:35 “Fuel Performance, Park use of Biofuels, and Clean Cities Program”
Jim Evanoff, Ranger, Yellowstone National Park

4:35 – 5:00 "The Economy and Biofuels: Impact of Recession and Prospects for Recovery" John Urbanchuk, LECG

6:00 Social hour

6:30 Banquet and AWARDS, Grantree Hotel
Cowboy Poet, Rusty Feathers, will entertain with song and poetry

TUESDAY, JUNE 30, 2009
7:15 AM
Breakfast in Honor of Canadian Speakers Sponsored by Canadian Consulate,
Welcoming Remarks by Stan Pence, Trade commissioner, Denver, (invited) for the Consulate General of Canada
Session: DDG : Moderator – Julie Ward, EPAC Board

8:15 – 8:45 “Wheat DDG in the Human Diet” –
Alphonsus Utioh, Manager, Product & Process Development, Food Development Center,
Portage la Prairie, MB Canada

8:45 – 9:15 “Role of DDG in the Prevention, Management and Treatment of Cardiovascular Disease” Rajat Sethi, Texas A&M Health Science Center

9:15 – 9:40 “Adding Value to Distillers Grains by Pelletizing and Microwave Drying”, Russ Meier, Russell J. Meier & Associates, Iowa

9:40 – 10:10 Break –
Trade Show Area, Madison/Lewis – Silent Auction Items

10:10 Session on Biodiesel moderated by Howard Haines

10:10 – 10:40 “Biodiesel Equals Fuel AND Food”
Joe Jobe, Executive Director, National Biodiesel Board, Jefferson City, Missouri

10:40 – 11:05 “Camelina for Biodiesel”, Alice Pilgeram, MSU Researcher on Camelina

11:05 – 11:30 “Biodiesel Testing and Program at MSU-Northern” Greg Kegel and Nestor Soriano MSU-Northern College of Technical Sciences

11:30 – 11:55 “Biofuels Impact & Update - Montana” Howard Haines, MT DEQ

12:00 – 1:00 Lunch

1:00 Conference resumes
Session: Moderator, Chet Hill Extension Specialist, Ag Diversification/Value Added, NDSU

1:00- 1:25 “Increasing Efficiencies with Biomass Energy Through Anaerobic Digesters” Trevor Nickel, Highmark Renewable Research, Vegreville Alberta. Canada

1:25 – 1:55 “Algae Biofuel: Where we Came From and the Road Ahead”
Keith Cooksey, MSU

1:55 – 2:30 “The Future Beyond Corn”
Phil Madson, President, KATZEN International

2:30 – 3:00 Break – Trade Show Area, Madison/Lewis - Silent Auction table, last chance to bid

Session: Moderator, Michelle Kautz

3:00 – 3:25 “Integrated Biorefinery Project for the Production of Cellulosic Ethanol and Power from Biomass Chris Roach, Project Development Manager, Abengoa Bioenergy Hybrid of Kansas

3:25 – 3:50 “Biomass to Biofuels: Introduction to Conversion and Advanced Harvest and Collection” Brad Blackwater, Senior Scientist, Idaho National laboratory, Idaho Falls, Idaho

3:50 – 4:20 “Advanced Integrated Biofuels with Animal Production”
Wendel Dreve and Marion Gilliland, Farmers Ethanol, LLC, Adamsville, Ohio.

4:20 – 4:45 “Opportunities for Funding Under the Stimulus Bill”
John Eustermann, Attorney, Stoel Rives LLP, Boise, ID

4:45- 5:10 TBA

5:10 Award silent auction prizes , Wrap up.
Agenda tentative as of May 20, titles and times may change.

Sponsors as of May 30 include:
Abengoa Bioenergy
CHS
Fagen, Inc.
KATZEN International, Inc.
Montana Department of Environmental Quality
Montana Wheat and Barley Committee
National Biodiesel Board
Prime Biosolutions

Registration Prices for EACH DAY at Conference

Monday, June 29 $120.00
Includes afternoon session, reception, banquet,
Entertainment and conference manual, + 1 break.

No reception or banquet $75.00

Tuesday, June 30 $120.00
Includes full day session, breakfast, lunch, 2 breaks
And conference manual.

Myth:
Enough testing has not been done on higher blends of ethanol.

Truth:
There has been more testing of E15 than there has been of any other fuel additive in the history of the EPA waiver process including the 11 that were approved. Multiple comprehensive studies involving over 100 vehicles, 85 vehicle and engine types, and 33 fuel dispensing units have been completed to evaluate the affects of ethanol-gasoline blends above as ethanol usage has increased. The EWG “study” is nothing more than a mere repackaging of a series of myths and misinformation by a group that is opposed to ethanol of any blend.10 percent ethanol, from E15 to E-85. These studies include a year-long drivability test and over 5,500 hours of materials compatibility testing. These tests have been completed by highly reputable sources, including the U.S. Department of Energy, Minnesota State University, and the Rochester Institute of Technology just to name a few. All of these studies have confirmed that using E15 in today's automobile fleet has no adverse impact on a car's performance, maintenance, or emissions.

Myth:
E15 presents issues with a car's engine durability and higher blends may not be compatible.

Truth:
Research has concluded that E15 is compatible with today's engines. A report prepared for the State of Minnesota studied the effect and performance of gasoline blended fuels containing 20 percent volume fuel ethanol on today's motor vehicle engines and engine components and concluded that the effects of 20 percent ethanol blended fuels do not present problems for current automotive or fuel dispensing equipment.

Myth:
E15 has a negative impact on a car's driveability.

Truth:
Studies show that E15 results in no difference in drivability compared to gasoline. A recent drivability study conducted for the state of Minnesota found that E20 provided similar power and performance to gasoline throughout the year and that the test fleet operated satisfactorily on both gasoline and E20 with no obvious differences between the fuels.

Myth:
E15 will increase a car's evaporative emissions.

Truth:
The Rochester Institute of Technology evaluated effects of E20 on 10 legacy vehicles; initial results after 75,000 collective miles driven found no fuel-related failures or significant vehicle problems and documented reductions in regulated tailpipe emissions when using E20 compared to conventional gasoline. This was confirmed by a series of two peer-reviewed studies prepared by Oak Ridge National Laboratory for the U.S. Department of Energy that concluded that when E15 and E20 were compared to traditional gasoline, there are no significant changes in vehicle tailpipe emissions. Further, a study by the Coordinating Research Council, Inc. evaluated effects of E0, E6, E20 and E85 on the evaporative emissions rates from permeation in five newer California vehicles and found that there was no statistically significant increase in diurnal permeation rates between E6 and E20.

Myth:
E15 cannot run on small engine equipment and will cause these products to fail.

Truth:
According to the DOE's study on the impact of higher ethanol blends on small engines, “The residential Class I as well as the commercial engines exhibited no sensitivity to ethanol from a durability perspective in the short duration of this project. The effect of ethanol on the durability of the residential Class IV engines was not clear given that a number of these engines failed during fulllife aging regardless of fuel type.”

Myth:
Small engine equipment users will be forced to use E15.

Truth:
The waiver application is not a mandate to use E15. In fact, consumers can and should have continued access to lower levels of ethanol in their gasoline.

Myth:
Raising the cap to E15 will lead to more land use and force CRP land to be converted for farming.

Truth:
The rise in corn production will be the result of better corn yields and not dramatically increased land use. The USDA projects American farmers will plant 85-90 million acres of corn from 2009 to 2015, well within historical boundaries for corn production. In addition, concerns that increased corn production will lead to farming on lands previously part of the Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) are misguided. In fact, participation in CRP has steadily increased since 2000 (only deceasing slightly last year). And when ethanol production nearly doubled between 2004 and 2006, CRP participation was at its highest level in almost 20 years.
Internationally, despite increases in the amount of coarse grains used for ethanol, the amount of land dedicated to coarse grains (corn, grain sorghum, barley, oats, rye, and millet) globally has decreased over the past 30 years. Global area for coarse grains has decreased 8 percent since 1980, while world grain ethanol production has increased dramatically. Despite a reduction in land dedicated to coarse grains, annual world coarse grain production has increased nearly 50 percent since 1980.

Myth:
Increasing the cap to E15 will increase corn prices.

Truth:
Due to expanding domestic and global corn supply, corn prices are expected to remain relatively stable. The USDA estimates that corn prices will fluctuate from $4.40-$3.65 per bushel from 2009 through 2015. At that price, the federal government could continue to save billions of dollars by avoiding the payment of counter-cyclical farm subsidies.

Myth:
Moving to E15 will result in higher food prices.

Truth:
The impact of ethanol production on food prices has been and will continue to be minimal. There are many reasons why the cost of food increased last summer, including rising middle classes all over the world, droughts in Australia and excessive speculation in agriculture commodity markets. Deregulated commodities markets opened the door for large financial services speculators to make huge “bets” that destabilized the structure of agriculture commodity markets, according to a study done by Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy.
Of course, the largest reason for the increase in food prices was the increase in oil prices. The average food product travels 1,500 miles from its source to get to the store shelf. Expert after expert said that ethanol had minimal impact on food prices, while Big Food and its trade associations continually tried to make American ethanol producers the scapegoat for higher food prices throughout 2008.

EPA Extends Waiver Comment Period
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has extended the period of time they will accept comments on the Green Jobs Waiver by another 60 days. The extension request was made by 36 organizations, including many of ethanol's opposition. The new deadline for submission of comments is July 20, 2009. Submit your favorable comments supporting the move to higher blends of ethanol TODAY by going to GoE15.com. We need YOUR help in making this happen. The more people we have on our side, the stronger voice we have for energy independence.

Your support of homegrown ethanol is needed now more than ever. Your voice can be heard by sending your favorable comments to the EPA. The deadline for comments is Thursday, May 21st. The easiest way to make your opinion and voice heard by the EPA is to email comments directly. To submit comments online you can do this via email at GrowthEnergy.org. It only takes a few minutes and will be submitted directly to the EPA for review. There are talking points and further information on the website for your use in making your comments heard. GO TO www.growthenergy.org OR www.goE15.com.

TAKE ACTION TODAY: SUPPORT E15
On March 6, 2009, Growth Energy and 54 ethanol manufacturers requested that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) increase ethanol blend levels in gasoline up to 15 percent (E15). Your support of homegrown ethanol is needed now more than ever. Please join us in submitting your thoughts on the benefits of ethanol to the EPA. The deadline has been extended to July 20th, 2009. BUT DON'T WAIT. There are several ways your voice can be heard on this issue.

You MUST submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0211, with your contact information and by one of the following methods:
• Email your comments to a-and-r-docket@epa.gov
• Submit your comment through www.goE15.com
• Fax your comments to (202) 566-1741.
• Mail your comments, please include two copies and send them to:
Air and Radiation Docket
Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0211
Environmental Protection Agency
Mailcode: 6102T
1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20460

First, please provide insight on how you are involved in or impacted by the ethanol industry and second, please include at least 3 of the following points in your comment submission:
• I strongly support increasing the blend of ethanol in our gasoline to 15 percent.
• We will grow our economy and create American jobs by moving to E15.
o According to a recent study conducted by North Dakota University researchers, moving to E15 will create more than 136,000 new green-collar jobs.
o Increasing blend levels from 10 to 15 percent will generate $24.4 billion for the U.S. economy and will displace seven billion gallons of imported gasoline each year.
• The science overwhelmingly supports E15 – in fact, there has been more testing of E15 than there has been of any other fuel additive in the history of the EPA waiver process.
o Oak Ridge National Laboratory research for the Department of Energy (DOE) that studied the effects of E15 on motor vehicles and small non-road engines concluded that when compared to traditional gasoline, E15 caused no significant changes in vehicle tailpipe emissions or drivability.
o The recent Minnesota Drivability Study presents data to support that using E15 results in no difference in drivability compared to gasoline.
o A report studying blends ranging from E10 – E85, prepared for the Energy & Environmental Research Center and Minnesota Center for Automotive Research for American Coalition, found exhaust emissions levels for all vehicles at all blend levels were within the applicable Clean Air Act standards.

Alaska Airlines-Horizon Air
Reservations - (800) 547-9308
Baggage - (206) 998-9797
Customer support - (206) 431-3647
Markets served (non-stop)
Seattle, WA
Website: www.alaskaair.com

________________________________________
Allegiant Air
Reservations Center: (702) 505–8888
Baggage - (866) 719–3910
Lost and Found : (866) 719–3910

Website: www.allegiantair.com

________________________________________
Delta
Reservations - 800-221-1212
404-765-5000
800-323-2323 for SkyMiles Members
800-325-1999 for Flight Information
Website: www.delta.com

________________________________________
Frontier
Reservations - (800) 432-1359
Customer service - (800) 265-5505

Website: www.frontierairlines.com

________________________________________
Northwest Airlines/KLM
Reservations - (800) 225-2525
Flight information - (800) 441-1818
Customer service - (800) 692-6955
Markets served (non-stop)
Minneapolis, MN
Website: www.nwa.com

________________________________________
United Express
Reservations - (800) UNITED-1
Flight information - (800) 824-6200
Customer service - (877) 228-1327
Markets served (non-stop)
Denver, CO
Website: www.united.com

________________________________________

Southwest Montana's Gallatin Field Airport (BZN) is located in the heart of the beautiful Gallatin Valley. BZN is the only airport serving as a year-round gateway for two Yellowstone National Park entrances. BZN also serves the recreation areas of Big Sky Resort, Moonlight Basin and the Bridger Bowl Ski Area as well as the business centers of Bozeman, Belgrade and Livingston and higher education at Montana State University. No matter what your aviation need may be, BZN can provide all of your southwest Montana air transportation needs.

Transportation:
• Car Rentals
• Shuttle Service
Planning:
• Travel Agencies/Vacation Planning
• Touring Companies
Airlines:
• Alaska Airlines 800-252-7522
• Allegiant Air 702–505–8888
• Delta Airlines 800-221-1212
• Frontier Airlines 800-265-5505
• Horizon Air 800-547-9308
• Northwest Airlines 800-252-7522
• United Express 800-UNITED-1
Additional Airline Information:
• Gallatin Field
• Bozeman Airport

WASHINGTON (April 16, 2009) – National Farmers Union President Roger Johnson today made the following statement in response to a report released last week by the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) on the impact of ethanol on food prices.

“The CBO report states what we have known all along, America’s farmers are not a significant reason for increasing grocery store prices. The report states that increased ethanol production caused a mere 0.5 and 0.8 percentage point increase in the price of food between April 2007 and April 2008.

“Increased ethanol production saved consumers $48 billion at the gas pump in 2007. The food cost increase attributable to ethanol is far less – between $6.1 and $9.7 billion per year. In other words, for every extra dollar consumers spent on food, they saved between about $5.00 and $8.00 in gasoline cost.

“Another comparison is the farmer’s share of the retail food dollar. The retail price of Safeway brand corn flakes on March 31 was $2.99. The farmer’s share was $0.06, just 1.9 percent.

“Despite the efforts by some to blame higher food costs on farmers and commodity prices, it is evident this is not the case. NFU is again calling for Congress to reconvene hearings to investigate higher retail food prices; while commodity prices have tanked since last summer’s peak, grocery store prices remain high.”

-30-

The 19th annual EPAC sponsored Biofuels Conference IS June 29th - 30th at the Best Western Grantree Inn Hotel, Bozeman, MT. The conference is meant to facilitate the continued development of the biofuel industry in the nation and especially in the region. Join key stakeholders from around the world to learn, network, and discuss emerging technologies about biofuels. The day and a half long conference begins Monday June 29th at noon and is titled “Fuel, Food and the Future”. One panel will expand on the well received discussion on distillers grains (DG) presented at the 2008 conference. Barley will be the focus of a session, and another session will feature biodiesel. The future possibilities will include discussion on Algae and anaerobic digestion.

EPAC conferences are known for quality presentations on cutting edge technologies and the latest industry path and progress information. Speakers include Craig Shealy, CEO for Osage Bio Energy, a Virginia based barley processing company; Tom Blake, barley breeder at Montana State University (MSU), and Clifford Bradley of AE Montana, Butte MT who is working on a barley straw to ethanol project. Rajat Sethi of Texas A&M who speaks on cardio health benefits of wheat and corn Distillers Grains (DG), Russ Meier of Iowa who will speak on Utilizing Industrial Microwaves to Dry Distillers Grains and Alphonsus Utioh, of the Food Development Center in Manitoba, Canada speaks on health benefits of the DG in a human diet. Keith Cooksey, an MSU Research Professor will speak on algae as a fuel feedstock. The Biodiesel session will include Joe Jobe, of the National Biodiesel Board. Alice Pilgarem of MSU-Bozeman and Howard Haines of MT DEQ. Greg Kegel, of MSU-Northern will speak on the biodiesel certification lab and testing facility on Northern’s campus.

Jim Evanoff, Ranger at Yellowstone National Park will talk about the Park’s use of biofuels and the Clean City program. Bill Hagy, Under Secretary for Rural Development at US Department of Agriculture in Washington DC will speak on new programs and funding opportunities in the USDA. Phil Madson of KATZEN Engineering will tell of ethanol processing. Trevor Nickel of Highmark Renewable Research, Vegreville, Alberta, Canada, will speak on a process to recover usable bio gas from manure produced at a feedlot that has a static capacity of 36,000 head of cattle. Other speakers have been invited on the issues of Cellulose, Fuel performance, Impact of Biofuels on prices. and will be announced as they are confirmed.

With its tightly focused agenda, this conference is intended to appeal to a broad range of attendees, including: biofuel producers, marketers and retailers, end users such as public and private fleet managers; research institutions; farmers, ranchers and agribusiness executives; Financial entities such as lenders, Financial institutions, private equity firms, venture capitalists as well as government regulators and all who are interested in this new and rapidly expanding green energy industry. An industry trade show will be held in conjunction with the conference..

EPAC organized in 1991 for the purpose of educating about biofuels. Join us and learn about biofuels by attending the 19th Annual 2009 EPAC Biofuel Conference.

EARTH WEEK PRESENTATION IN WASHINGTON DC
Food and Fuel – The Real Story “Eat the Best and Drive the Rest”
Call Pam or Shirley @ EPAC 406-785-3722 for information

NASHUA MT – As part of Washington DC Earth Week activities Ethanol Producers And Consumers (EPAC) will present Food and Fuel – The Real Story “Eat the Best and Drive the Rest.” At 1:30 p.m. in room 107A of the USDA Jamie Whitten building, 1400 Independence Avenue. The 19 year old ethanol/biofuel educational non-profit group was invited by Roger Conway, Director of the USDA Office of Energy Policy and New Uses to repeat a presentation that shows the fallacy of a food versus fuel issue. The presentation is in response to last year’s heavily financed Grocery Manufacturer’s anti-ethanol media campaign. EPAC has made similar Food and Fuel presentations in the past, including the 1993 event that was covered by Successful Farming magazine.

The presentation features speakers that include Roger Conway; Shirley Ball, Executive Director, EPAC, Nashua, MT; Kevin Hicks, Research Leader, Crop Conversion Science and Engineering Research at the USDA/ARS Eastern Regional Research Center, Wyndmoor, PA; Larry Schaffer, National Biodiesel Board; Greg Krissek, ICM, Colwich KS and Brittany Ulrich, MOR Technology, Metropolis, IL.

Topics will include the CCSER barley to ethanol process; a new technology that doesn't compete with food production; provides more revenue to rural communities; and shown to improve the water quality of sensitive waterways, such as the Chesapeake Bay. ICM, a process technology company, will present work being done by their company to ensure that food values will be retained in the ethanol process. MOR Technology has developed a unique fractionation process that will maximize the production of food grade distillers grains and the biodiesel process for fuel and food from the National Biodiesel Board .

The speakers will detail the processes to make ethanol that shows that only the starch or sugar in the grain becomes fuel, leaving all the nutrients, including protein, fiber, vitamins and germ as a distillers grains (DG) co-product that can be used in feed / food products. Samples of the DG will be on display. EPAC provides food and snack samples prepared using wheat distillers grains as one of the ingredients for attendees to taste. .

The majority of the ethanol produced in the United States is from feed corn, and the resulting DG is a valuable high protein feed supplement to the livestock industry, which is recognized as a part of the food chain. New research is showing Distiller Grains could greatly enhance the human diet.

In addition to the speakers, research papers including: Alphonsus Utioh of the Food Development Centre in Portage la Prairie, Manitoba, Canada, Kurt Rosentrater, a lead scientist with the USDA’s Agricultural Research Service, Brookings SD and Rajat Sethi, Assistant Professor, Irma Lerma Rangel College of Pharmacy at Texas A&M and previously the Senior Scientist at the Institute of Cardiovascular Sciences at the Faculty of Medicine at Manitoba, Canada..

Utioh and colleagues have used the grains as an ingredient for a number of baked foods that according to the Canadian food labelling regulations, qualify for a “source of fibre” nutrient content claim as they contain more than 2 g of fibre per serving. The wheat DDGS used as a food ingredient improves the nutritional profile, while offering economic advantage to the wheat-based ethanol industry. Fiber content is also an important factor to diabetes patients.

Rosentrater, spearheaded a new initiative to develop value added uses for distillers grains. as ethanol production is increased to research and manage the co-products generated with food products currently untapped but with potentially high volume utilization.

Sethi’s research found that despite the use of DDG as a livestock feed for centuries, there were no studies reported in the peer-reviewed literature that examined the health-related benefits of distillers grain”. Sethi’s preclinical research published as a US patent as well as in abstracts demonstrates DG induced benefits when incorporated into the human diet.

This “Earth Week” presentation’s purpose is to continue to counter the fallacy that the production and use of ethanol will cause hunger in the world and to encourage other researchers and ethanol production facilities and companies to take an in depth look at what is needed to bring the DG to a higher value.

The media and general public are encouraged to attend this important presentation to learn the realities of fuel and food. You can eat the best, and drive the rest. Call EPAC at 406-785-3722 or email epac@ethanolmt.org for further information.

Greenhouse gas rules could fuel oil dependence
California's proposed emissions standards favor petroleum over biofuels.

Next week, the California Air Resources Board, or CARB -- the same agency that only five years ago gained notoriety for its role in "killing" the electric car -- could be in a position to deliver another crippling blow to the United States' effort to achieve energy independence.

As part of California's strategy to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from transportation fuels, CARB is pushing for the enactment of a low-carbon fuel standard, or LCFS, that aims to regulate the emissions level of petroleum refiners, biofuels producers and others that produce or import the transportation fuels used in California. The credit or penalty would be assessed according to both the direct and indirect greenhouse gas emissions associated with each of the steps in the fuel's life cycle, including production, transport and tailpipe emissions.
Such "cradle to grave" accounting sounds logical only if it allows all fuels to compete on an equal footing. But this is what the fuel standard in its current version fails to do.

At a time when the U.S. is charting its way out of its debilitating -- and growing -- oil dependence, CARB's plan puts biofuels at a comparative disadvantage against petroleum. It does so by requiring that indirect greenhouse gas-emitting activities, such as deforestation and plowing up grasslands -- which are often associated with increased use of biofuels -- be considered, while failing to account for indirect carbon-emitting activities related to petroleum production. CARB's explanation: "No other significant indirect effects that result in large greenhouse gas emissions have been identified."

That statement may be true for roughly half of California's oil, which is either drilled in the state or imported from Alaska, but certainly not for the half coming from distant places such as Saudi Arabia, Iraq or Colombia. Some of the direct carbon-intensive activities that CARB's staff prefer to ignore are: pumping seawater into the wells of Saudi Arabia to increase reservoir pressure, transporting the crude to processing facilities where sulfur and other impurities are removed, and powering a tanker during a long voyage across two oceans.
But what makes their model truly discriminatory is the failure to account for the environmental impact of indirect activities, such as the military operations related to our oil use. The jets, tanks, ships and Humvees patrolling the Persian Gulf or used by the Special Forces protecting the oil pipelines in Colombia don't run on vegetable oil, and the electricity powering military bases dedicated to protecting our access to oil is not made in wind farms. Ignoring those factors while speculating about the role of deforestation (much of the deforestation around the world has nothing to do with biofuels but with the logging industry) is intellectually dishonest.

Recent studies have shown that the amount of fossil fuel needed to make gasoline is nearly twice the amount needed for corn ethanol production, and more than 10 times that for cellulosic ethanol (made from switchgrass and other non-food plants). Further, there is a net reduction in greenhouse gas emissions as a result of using ethanol as fuel. The Argonne National Laboratory found that, on a per-gallon basis, even the most inefficient form of biofuel -- corn ethanol -- reduces greenhouse gas emissions by 18% to 29% compared with gasoline; sugar-cane ethanol reduces emissions by 56%, and cellulosic ethanol has an even greater benefit with a more than 80% reduction. A 2009 report commissioned by the International Energy Agency reached similar conclusions. Despite these clear benefits to the environment, CARB is bent on singling out biofuels as enemies of the planet.

Putting aside the costly bureaucratic nightmare the state of California would have to endure in analyzing the carbon footprint of each step in the pathway for each gallon of fuel sold in the state, the indirect carbon accounting could have a chilling effect on new investment and the development of new technologies -- all at a time when the nascent biofuels industry is already challenged by the economic downturn. This is all too unfortunate because scientific advancement is exactly what is needed to advance biofuels from corn to ultra-low carbon sources such as switchgrass, forestry residues, urban waste or algae.

The proposed standard is not simply a scientific or environmental issue. It is a matter of national security, which is threatened by our reliance on oil. With hundreds of billions of dollars leaving our economy annually to finance our oil dependence, it is also a matter of economic security.

It is often the case that as California goes, so goes the country. Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger should realize that implementing the fuel standard as proposed would only cement oil's virtual monopoly in the transportation sector and dial back the progress made toward energy independence.

Gal Luft, executive director of the Institute for the Analysis of Global Security and co-founder of the Set America Free Coalition, is a coauthor of "Energy Security Challenges for the 21st Century" and "Turning Oil into Salt: How Breaking the Oil Monopoly Can Make Us Prosper Again."

HEADLINES:
Media Advisory - Food and Fuel – The Real Story: “Eat the Best and Drive the Rest”
Ethanol Producers And Consumers Host Legislative Reception
EPA Assured A Petro Based Economy: Shame On Us
Co-Product Cuts Feed Costs, Increases Income In Chile
EPAC Attends Petroleum Marketers Meeting
National Biodiesel News From the Red River Farm Network
Grassley Upset With Land-Use Regs
U.S. Governors Push for 13% Ethanol Blend Rate
MSU Researcher Finds Interest In Algae To Fuel
USDA Chief Backs Boost of Ethanol Blend
Harvesting Clean Energy Conference

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

SPIRIT OF ETHANOL AWARD
STUDENT TO BE RECOGNIZED AT BIOFUELS CONFERENCE

Students who have conducted projects relating to Ethanol, Biodiesel or other biofuels are invited to submit a summary of that project to EPAC (Ethanol Producers And Consumers) for consideration for the “Spirit of Ethanol” award. EPAC is a non-profit, grass roots organization who supports the production and use of Biofuels as a clean and renewable alternative energy. Organized in 1991, EPAC offers the competition each year to a student who has completed a project about Biofuels
The project is self determined. Past entries have included essays and hands on projects dealing with the production or use of ethanol or biodiesel; feedstock crops that can be processed to biofuels, the value added opportunities of distillers grains co-products and fuel performance. Students ages 13-21 who have completed any Biofuels related project for school, 4-H, FFA or other youth groups in the past year are invited to apply. Each entry will be a maximum of two pages that outlines the nature of the project, the results, and why the project was chosen, the teacher or leader that oversaw the project. Please attach a separate sheet with contact information and include any awards won in other competitions as well as a photo that could be used in the conference manual and press. Entries are due by May 28, 2009. Applications can be returned to the EPAC office at 172 Ball Road, Nashua, Montana or by email to epac@ethanolmt.org or pamd@ethanolmt.org.

The “Spirit of Ethanol” award winner will be chosen and announced by the EPAC Board of Directors on Monday, June 1, 2009. The “Spirit of Ethanol” award is a plaque recognizing the winner, $100.00 in cash and full registration and lodging at the 19th annual EPAC conference. One parent or leader of the winner will receive a free registration to the conference; lodging not included.

The 19th Annual EPAC Biofuel Conference will be held June 29 – 30, 2009 in Bozeman, Montana.

The popular one and a half day conference attracts an international audience. The 2009 conference Titled “Fuel: Food AND The Future,” will feature speakers who are knowledgeable in feedstocks, processing methods, financing facilities, fuel performance and other biofuels issues; and an industry trade show.

For more information about this competition or the conference please call 406-785-3722 or visit EPAC’s web site at www.ethanolmt.org
####

The 19th annual EPAC sponsored Biofuels Conference will be held June 29th and 30th at the Best Western Grantree Hotel, Bozeman, MT. The conference is meant to facilitate the continued development of the biofuel industry, in the nation and especially in the region.

Join key stakeholders from around the world to learn, network, and discuss emerging technologies about biofuels. The day and a half long conference that begins Monday June 29th at noon and adjourns at the end of day Tuesday, June 20th is titled “Fuel, Food and the Future”. One session will expand on the well received discussion on distillers grains (DG) presented at the 2008 conference. Barley will be the focus of one session, and another session will feature biodiesel. Algae, a possible feedstock for the future will be presented and Trevor Nickel of Highmark Renewable Research, Vegreville, Alberta Canada, will speak on a process to recover usable bio gas from manure produced at a feedlot that has a static capacity of 36,000 head of cattle.

EPAC conferences are known for quality presentations of cutting edge technologies and the latest industry path and progress information. The following speakers have already confirmed they will attend. They include Joel Stone, Chief operating officer for Osage Bio Energy, a Virginia based barley processing company; Tom Blake, barley breeder at Montana State University (MSU), and Clifford Bradley of AE Montana, Butte MT. Also Rajat Sethi, of Texas A&M who speaks on the health benefits of wheat and corn DG, Russ Meier, of Iowa who will speak on his work to develop a microwave drying system for DDGS. Keith Cooksey, MSU Research Professor who will speak on algae, and biodiesel speakers that include Joe Jobe, of the National Biodiesel Board and Alice Pilgrem of MSU.

Jim Evanoff, Ranger at Yellowstone National Park will talk about the Park’s use of biofuels and the Clean City program. Bill Hagy, Acting Deputy Under Secretary in the office of Rural Development at the US Department of Agriculture in Washington DC will speak on new programs and funding opportunities in the USDA. Other speakers include Phil Madson, KATZEN Engineering.

With its tightly focused agenda, this conference is intended to appeal to a broad range of attendees, including: biofuel producers, marketer and retailers, end users such as public and private fleet managers; research institutions; farmers, ranchers and agribusiness executives; Financial entities such as lenders, Financial institutions, private equity firms, and venture capitalists as well as government regulators and all who are interested in this new and rapidly expanding green energy industry.

An industry trade show will be held throughout the two day conference.

EPAC organized in 1991 for the purpose of educating about biofuels. Join us. Attend the 19th Annual 2009 EPAC Biofuel Conference.

Ready for more corn in your tank?
Despite opposition from the livestock industry, food manufacturers and environmentalists, trade groups and state officials rally to increase the break in the blend wall

By Sara Wyant

Ethanol advocates say "it's all about the economy, stupid." At a time when the industry is struggling, they say that including more ethanol in our nation's transportation fuels can provide jobs and stimulate the economy--especially in rural areas where most of the ethanol is produced.
"A new study shows that moving from the blend of E10 to the blend E15 could create and support 136,000 new jobs and inject about $24 billion into the economy annually," emphasized former Iowa Congressman Jim Nussle during a recent press conference. Nussle is the latest high profile person, along with former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich and National Farmers Union President Tom Buis, to join forces with Growth Energy, as the trade group launches a major public relations campaign to increase the blend rate from the current 10 percent level.
That ethanol blend rate study, conducted by North Dakota State University's Department of Agribusiness and Applied Economics, also concluded that we would need another 6 billion gallons of ethanol production capacity to meet the demand for ethanol at a 15 percent blend rate.
Researcher Nancy Hodur says that translates into roughly sixty 100 million-gallon-per-year corn ethanol facilities. In addition to the annual employment and economic contribution of the additional ethanol production, the construction of these new facilities would lead to a one-time economic boost of $36.8 billion and create more than 260,000 new construction-related jobs.
"While there have been many media reports about the struggling ethanol sector, there has been little discussion about the cause," said Dr. Larry Leistritz, professor of agricultural economics at North Dakota State University and contributor to this report. "Part of the industry's challenge is this regulatory cap. Lifting the cap could provide serious benefits by putting the industry on a path for growth and generating billions of dollars in revenue for many struggling communities."
In EPA's hands
Last week, Growth Energy formally requested the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) raise the "decades-old, arbitrary limit" for blending ethanol with gasoline from the current 10 percent (E10) up to 15 percent (E15). To approve the higher ethanol blend request, the EPA only needs to determine that ethanol blends up to 15 percent will not affect the emission control systems in vehicles. The EPA has 270 days to review, collect public comment, and make a decision.
The Renewable Fuels Association also joined with Growth Energy, the American Coalition for Ethanol, the National Ethanol Vehicle Coalition, and other groups in filing an official waiver request with the EPA, asking it to approve for general use, gasoline blended with up to 15 percent ethanol.
Meanwhile, Ford Motor Company became the first automaker to publicly embrace the widespread use of higher ethanol blends. In the past, many auto companies have been reluctant to support added ethanol for fear that the alcohol could lead to damage to fuel lines and catalytic converters.
"Ford endorses efforts to increase base level blends up to E15 and collaborate with key stakeholders to overcome challenges with introducing these higher levels of ethanol," Susan Cischke, Ford's group vice president for sustainability, environment and safety engineering, wrote in a letter to Jeff Broin, CEO of POET, and the main funding source for Growth Energy.

State officials on the bandwagon
Joining the effort to increase the blend rate are several governors and the leading agriculture officials from 10 Midwestern and western states. On March 6, they urged President Barack Obama to support the production and use of fuel blends that contain more ethanol than now allowed.
"The ethanol industry is under considerable financial stress because ethanol, unlike oil, is held to less than 10 percent of the market," said North Dakota Agriculture Commissioner Roger Johnson. "Now is the time to move forward by increasing the base fuel blend to 15 or 20 percent ethanol." The letter to Obama was signed by Johnson and his counterparts from Iowa, Kansas, Michigan, Minnesota, Montana, Nebraska, Ohio, South Dakota and Wisconsin.
Even USDA Secretary Tom Vilsack endorses the concept and indicates that the EPA could act relatively quickly on Growth Energy's request. Vilsack says that "We'd love to see 15 percent." However, his current focus is on an increase to 12 or 13 percent because it could be accomplished quickly and with minimal scientific review.
"Our hope is that EPA can come to the same conclusion we have, which is that this is something that can be done within existing regulations without a great deal of time spent reviewing the science," he explained.
Not so fast
After launching an aggressive campaign to limit the amount of corn going into fuel production last year, food manufacturers and livestock groups are none too happy about a higher blend rate for corn-based ethanol. A coalition of 10 livestock and grocery groups sent a letter to EPA last month, asking administrator Lisa Jackson to go slow with any changes.
The groups said EPA should only consider raising the ethanol blend after cellulosic and advanced biofuels are commercially available throughout the nation, Congress has phased out the nation's tariff on ethanol imports and EPA has conducted a rulemaking process, including a 180-day public comment period, on the proposed change.
"Our organizations strongly oppose proposals to increase the level at which ethanol can be blended into motor gasoline and we urge you to subject these proposals to the most careful analysis," according to a letter from the coalition, which includes the National Chicken Council, the National Pork Producers Council, the Grocery Manufacturers Association and the National Restaurant Association.
The groups ask that EPA hold off on approving higher ethanol blends until several ongoing agency policy efforts are completed, including EPA's greenhouse gas lifecycle analysis required by the 2007 energy law, an ongoing EPA and energy department assessment of the impact of mid-level blends on engines, and a National Academy of Sciences study of the impact of the renewable fuel standard (RFS) that the 2007 energy law mandated the academy release this spring.
Environmentalists also urge a "go slow approach" to higher blends, citing fears about water pollution from increased corn production and concerns over availability of water supplies. They recently issued a platform that they say represents a sensible biofuels policy, including:
* Federal policy should no longer seek to expand the production and use of corn ethanol and the U.S. government should freeze the renewable fuels mandate (RFS) for conventional fuels at current levels.
* Change the direction of U.S. biofuels policy by phasing out the blender's tax credit while phasing in tax credits or subsidies for renewable fuels that are scaled in accordance to the fuel's relative environmental, health, and consumer protection merits.
* Rebalance the U.S. renewable energy and energy conservation portfolio to reflect the relative contribution true renewable energy options make to reducing fossil fuel use, enhancing the environment, spurring economic development, and increasing energy security.
* Proceed with caution by engaging in serious and practical research on "advanced biofuels" to ensure we avoid the same kind of "unintended consequences" that have resulted from the push to expand production of corn ethanol.
"Building a future economy based on renewable energy is absolutely critical to our country and our children. We need to overhaul our biofuels policies now to rescue any hope that sustainable biofuels will be part of that future," said Craig Cox, Midwest vice president for the Environmental Working Group.
While both sides are offering plenty of advice, the folks at EPA must ultimately decide whether to change the blend rate. Given what we are already hearing from the Obama administration, it appears that the new team is prepared to build on the renewable energy platform they inherited and keep moving forward with increased levels of ethanol.
Editor's note: Columnist Sara Wyant is president of Agri-Pulse Communications, Inc. and publishes a bi-weekly newsletter, Agri-Pulse, on food and farm policy. For more information, you can e-mail her at Agripulse@aol.com.

USDA raises ethanol use, corn price forecasts

After cutting its forecasts of corn use for ethanol in recent months, USDA on Wednesday raised its forecast by 100 million bushels to 3.7 billion bushels in the marketing year that began in September, 2008.

USDA raised its forecast "on indications of improving blender incentives and higher ethanol use," the agency said in its World Agriculture Supply and Demand Estimates report, also noting that blender margins have become increasingly favorable since late February as gasoline prices rose relative to ethanol prices.

A continuing recovery in weekly production of gasoline blends with ethanol also is supporting ethanol demand, as are the latest data on ethanol production, imports, and stocks which indicate record use in December, according to the report.

USDA raised its 2008/09 season-average farm price for corn to a range of $3.90 to $4.30 per bushel, from a range of $3.65 to $4.15 last month.

Soybeans

USDA lowered its U.S. soybean ending stocks forecast for 2008/09 to a projected 185 million bushels, down 25 million as increased soybean exports are expected to be only partly offset by lower crush.

USDA raised its U.S. season-average soybean price forecast to a range of $8.85 to $9.85 per bushel, up 10 cents on both ends of the range.

EPAC (Ethanol Producers And Consumers) has been invited by Roger Conway, Director of the USDA Office of Energy Policy and New Uses to repeat a presentation that shows that the food versus fuel issue is a fallacy. EPAC has made similar Food and Fuel presentations in the past, including the 1993 event that was covered by Successful Farming magazine. The presentation will be April 20, 2009 as part of Washington DC Earth Week activities, at 1:30 p.m. in room 107A of the USDA Whitten building, 1400 Independence Avenue. The event is open to the public.

The presentation will feature speakers including Roger Conway; Shirley Ball, Executive Director, EPAC, Nashua, MT; Kevin Hicks, Research Leader, Crop Conversion Science and Engineering Research at the USDA/ARS Eastern Regional Research Center, Wyndmoor, PA; Larry Schaefer, National Biodiesel Board; and representatives from ICM, Colwich, KS and MOR Technology, Metropolis, IL.

Hicks and his associates at CCSER have developed a barley to ethanol process. This new technology doesn't compete with food production; allows production of ethanol on the East Coast where there is high demand for transportation fuels; provides more revenue to rural communities; and will improve the water quality of sensitive waterways, such as the Chesapeake Bay. ICM, a process technology company, will tell about work being done by their company to ensure that food values will be retained in the ethanol process. MOR Technology will tell about their unique fractionation process that will maximize the production of food grade distillers grains. National Biodiesel Board Representative Larry Schaeffer will talk about the biodiesel process.

Speakers will explain processes to make ethanol, showing that only starch or sugar in the grain becomes fuel, leaving all the nutrients, including protein, fiber, vitamins and germ as a distillers grains (DG) co-product that can be used in feed / food products. Samples of DG will be part of the display. A highlight will be foods and snacks samples provided by EPAC that are prepared using wheat distillers grains as one of the ingredients.

The majority of the ethanol produced in the United States is from feed corn, and the resulting DG is a valuable high protein feed supplement to the livestock industry, which is recognized as a part of the food chain.

However, a few companies, research facilities and organizations, who have been leaders in the fight about the Food versus Fuel issue, have recognized the value of the DG if the product were to be made from human grade feed stock and utilized in the human diet. DG contains high amounts of protein and fiber, both recognized as important factors in a health diet. Research is showing the DG could greatly enhance the human diet.

In addition to the speakers, research papers will be available at the presentation, including: Alphonsus Utioh of the Food Development Centre in Portage la Prairie, Manitoba, Canada. A speaker at the 2008 EPAC conference, Utioh states “The fuel versus food debate has been intensified in the last few years with the increasing production of fuel ethanol from cereal grains like corn and wheat. Many people believe that cereal grains should only be used for food and not for fuel. However ethanol co-products such as distillers dried grains and solubles (DDGS) are rich in protein and fibre and could be used as food ingredients.” Utioh and others obtained a sample of wheat distillers grains and have used the grains as an ingredient for a number of baked foods. Utioh reported “According to the Canadian food labelling regulations, these products qualify for a “source of fibre” nutrient content claim as they contain more than 2 g of fibre per serving.” Wheat DDGS can be used as a food ingredient to improve the nutritional profile, while offering economic advantage to the wheat-based ethanol industry. Fiber content is an important factor to diabetes patients.

Kurt Rosentrater, a lead scientist with the USDA’s Agricultural Research Service in Brookings SD spearheaded a new initiative to develop value added uses for distillers grains. He spoke at the 2008 EPAC conference and remarked that as ethanol production is increased, the industry must learn to manage the co-products that will be generated. “We face a pressing need for research into and development of value added uses for co-product streams. Food Products currently are an untapped but potentially high volume utilization of these products, but much work remains to be done to develop ingredients from distillers grains that can be used successfully in food products.”

Another paper will be from Rajat Sethi, Assistant Professor, Irma Lerma Rangel College of Pharmacy at Texas A&M and previously the Senior Scientist at the Institute of Cardiovascular Sciences at the Faculty of Medicine at Manitoba, Canada. Sethi stated at the 2008 EPAC conference “The fuel versus food debate has been intensified in the last few years with the increasing production of fuel ethanol from cereal grains like corn and wheat. Ethanol co-products such as distillers dried grains and solubles (DDGS) are rich in protein and fibre and could be used as food ingredients. Unfortunately, despite the use of DDG as a livestock feed for centuries, there are no studies reported in the peer-reviewed literature that have examined the health-related benefits of distillers grain”. Sethi’s preclinical research published as a US patent as well as in abstracts demonstrates DG induced benefits when incorporated into the human diet.

The immediate purpose of the April presentation will be to counter the myth that the production and use of ethanol will cause hunger in the world. A secondary purpose is to encourage other researchers and ethanol production facilities and companies to take an in depth look at what is needed to bring the DG to a higher value.

The presentation is organized by EPAC, a 19 year old non profit, membership organization that educates about biofuels by presenting conferences and workshops, through their informational web site and the distribution of factual publications.

The media and general public are encouraged to attend this important presentation and learn the realities of fuel and food. You can eat the best, and drive the rest. Call EPAC at 406-785-3722 or email epac@ethanolmt.org for further information.

Governors’ Biofuels Coalition Calls on President Obama to
Tap Job Growth Potential in Biofuels Industry

Group Also Discusses Proactive Initiatives to Strengthen
Public Support for Biofuels

WASHINGTON, DC—According to the 35 member Governors’ Biofuels Coalition (GBC), the nation’s biofuels industry is poised to provide immediate job growth, generate economic activity and prepare the nation for the next increase in world oil prices. The coalition is asking President Barack Obama to provide national policy leadership and vision to capitalize on the opportunity that biofuels offer.

Ethanol and biodiesel provided employment for more than 259,000 workers in all sectors of the U.S. economy in 2007. Additionally, the ethanol industry added $47.6 billion to the nation’s GDP and generated $1.2 billion for the federal treasury, while reducing farm program payments by $6 billion last year. The average 100 million gallon ethanol plant provides $367 million to the local economy, creates 50 direct and 1300 related jobs. “Biofuels is truly a homegrown industry that has proven to transform communities, broaden the tax base and provide solid job growth,” said Governor Hoeven.

North Dakota Governor John Hoeven and Iowa Governor Chet Culver, chair and vice chair of the GBC, said the nation’s biofuels industry, said the nation’s biofuels industry was energized by the Renewable Fuels Standard (RFS) established by Congress in 2005.

“With the advent of the RFS, the biofuels industry was clearly hitting its stride—creating thousands of jobs and improving our balance of trade by reducing oil imports,” Governor Hoeven said. “Help from the federal government in terms of fiscal support and policy leadership could revitalize this critical industry, create jobs, spur investment and strengthen the ability of biofuels to address the economic, energy and environmental challenges that face our nation.”

“Record oil prices led the way in creating our recent economic downturn. Pump prices are creeping back up and the days of cheap gas are in our rearview mirrors,” Governor Culver added. “Now is the time to prepare our nation for the certain and inevitable return of high oil demand and high oil prices. The biofuels industry is ready—right now—to help our nation’s economy get back on its feet. And the sooner we revitalize this industry, the sooner we will all reap the benefits of domestically produced fuels and the reduction of costly oil imports that will result.”

On February 18, 2009, the Governors’ Biofuels Coalition sent a letter to the White House acknowledging President Obama’s support for biofuels and urging him to take specific actions to advance the contribution of the biofuels industry to the nation’s workforce, economy and energy security including:

Articulate a vision for the nation’s biofuels future that clearly outlines the role of biofuels in addressing and overcoming America’s economic, energy and environmental challenges;

Establish an interagency task force on lifecycle greenhouse gas emissions and transportation fuels, involving the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and U.S. Department of Energy (DOE). The task force would be charged with resolving the debate on this issue by annually and objectively assessing and comparing the lifecycle analysis of biofuels;

Initiate an immediate substantially similar ruling from the EPA on E13 that would immediately expand the market for domestic biofuels by approving 13% ethanol blends, which are already within EPA’s allowable variance;

Create new policy options that continue to increase the sustainability of biofuels feedstock production with USDA leading an effort focused on water efficiency and water quality, fertilizer use, habitat conservation, and crop management practices related to the production of biofuels and next-generation, home-grown fuels;

Implement the nation’s first comprehensive biofuel market development program by creating policies that remove marketing barriers to E85, increase flexible fuel vehicle production, assist retail marketing efforts and increase funding for E85 development.

In addition to requesting the President’s support on these issues, the Governors’ Biofuels Coalition outlined its role in initiating a grassroots effort to strengthen and broaden public awareness and support for biofuels development and market availability. “It is important that America keep its eye on the ball when it comes to biofuels,” Governor Hoeven added. “We must continue to engage the public about the value of ethanol and biofuels. The governors involved in the broad-based GBC are uniquely positioned to provide leadership in this regard and speak directly to our citizens specifically about what biofuels can do for our states.”

During the news conference, the GBC also acknowledged support and cooperation from a number of organizations including the American Coalition for Ethanol, Growth Energy, Biotechnology Industry Organization, Renewable Fuels Association, National Biodiesel Board, Clean Fuels Development Coalition, Environmental and Energy Study Institute, National Ethanol Vehicle Coalition and 25x’25.

“Difficult economic times in America have historically led to a surge in innovation and creativity,” Governor Culver added. “Today’s biofuels and the next generation of biofuels are an area in which innovation and technological advancement are happening every day. Biofuels truly are a growth area for our nation—and we cannot afford to squander their potential in righting America’s economy today—and strengthening America’s future. In other words, biofuels offer an immediate solution as well as a long-term strategic initiative for our nation.”

Hard times or not, Minnesotans should use, support biofuels
By Robert Moffitt | Thursday, Feb. 5, 2009

Anyone who has glanced at a newspaper headline or listened to the news in recent months understands just how bad the recession has become. In spite of a sputtering economy, the fundamental advantages that biofuels have over traditional petroleum fuels haven't changed. They are still largely renewable, locally produced fuels that reduce Minnesota's dependence on oil from other parts of the world. Using biofuels can significantly reduce ozone and particulate air pollution, as well as provide sharp reductions in greenhouse gas emissions from vehicles.
Unlike many other green energy options — electric vehicles, solar, nuclear, cellulosic biofuels — E85 and biodiesel are fuels that are being used by thousands of vehicles right now, making an impact today.

Building a new-fuel infrastructure
Using these cleaner-burning fuels today does not preclude the development of other fuels or technologies. On the contrary, "first-generation" biofuels can help build an infrastructure of retail stations and vehicles that serve as the foundation for other "second-generation" fuels, such as cellulosic ethanol or biodiesel made from algae.

The American Lung Association of Minnesota has supported the use of E85 and biodiesel because of its proven ability to reduce harmful emissions. Every day, we all need clean, safe air to breathe. Exhaust from motor vehicles is a major source of air pollution in this region, and we continue in our mission for clean air.

Even when gasoline prices go down, many Minnesotans continue to opt for clean-air solutions. Organizations such as the Automotive Association of America say that we continue to drive less than we did in the past. According to the Minnesota Department of Commerce, gasoline sales declined by 3 percent in 2008 compared with 2007. In the Twin Cities, Metro Transit bus ridership was up 6 percent. Statewide, E85 sales increased by nearly 5 percent, and prevented an estimated 89,548 tons of lifecycle carbon-dioxide emissions and other harmful pollutants from entering our air last year.

Biodiesel requirement to increase
In May, the state's biodiesel requirement increases from a 2 percent blend to a 5 percent blend of biodiesel at virtually all diesel outlets. That's an important step, as a majority of our food, raw materials and manufactured products move on diesel fuel. Moving away from oil — a commodity not found in Minnesota — to biodiesel, a renewable, cleaner-burning fuel we can easily produce from a wide variety of sources, is good news for Minnesota's economy and environment.

As budgets get tight, and many look for programs and initiatives to trim, some will no doubt target biofuels, saying that "we just can't afford them" right now. On the contrary, I argue that once having taken our first small steps away from near total dependence on petroleum fuels for transportation, we can't afford to go backward now.

Robert Moffitt is the communications director for the American Lung Association of Minnesota.

Greater “sustainability” in the field and the “factory” are crucial to sustaining ethanol production and profits, new Ag Secretary Tom Vilsack maintained last week.

Vilsack, a former chairman of the Governors Ethanol Coalition, recognized the biofuels industry currently is under “a particular strain.”

Efficient resource management will reduce the environmental footprint of ethanol production and help progressive biofuels producers survive difficult times, he said.

Vilsack supports accelerated research into more efficient use of corn and other existing ethanol feedstocks and development of new sources that are “even more beneficial from a climate change perspective.”

“USDA has a role, I believe, in helping develop and promote best practices that will increase and enhance management efficiencies which, in turn, will allow more of these producers of ethanol to stay in business,” Vilsack said.

“Meanwhile, I think it’s important for us to take a look at the fairly significant set of legislative proposals that were made in the energy title of the farm bill and work very quickly to implement as many of those as possible. We need to create additional demand for advanced biofuels and renewable energy.”

Vilsack believes USDA can help producers modify practices and rural communities eye changes “to embrace renewable energy” and encourage producer consideration of biomass crops to expand renewable feedstock supplies.

The ag secretary also emphasized the potential value of “woody biomass,” and promised to mobilize the U.S. Forestry Service in exploring forest-based energy resources.

He stressed the need for a “good working relationship” between USDA and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and said EPA administrator-designate Lisa Jackson has pledged interagency cooperation.

Jackson will oversee implementation of the national renewable fuels standard (RFS) as well as any climate change regulations that emerge from Congress. The RFS requires 36 billion gallons of annual biofuels use by 2022.

“Obviously, we have a serious challenge that has been put forward by Congress to meet various mandates for renewable fuels,” Vilsack said. “In order to do that, we’re going to have to figure out ways to incorporate ethanol into the fuel system at even greater levels over the course of time.

“It’s also clear that within a very short number of years, we’re going to have to be relying on something other than merely corn-based ethanol."

Lt Governor and Mrs. John Bohlinger were part of the large crowd that attended a biofuels and agriculture legislative reception in Helena last week. Other officials included Ron DeYong, Director of the Mt Dept of Agriculture, former Governor Tim Babcock and his wife Betty, Speaker of the House Bob Bergren, and Public Service Commissioner Greg Jergenson. The reception, co-hosted by Ethanol Producers And Producers (EPAC) and Women Involved In Farm Economics (WIFE), was also attended by more than 60 legislators, as well as personnel from state agencies.

Sponsors of the event included CHS, a company that markets ethanol blended fuel and biodiesel statewide; KATZEN International, an Ohio based company that designs ethanol plants; Montana Ethanol, a company with plans to build an ethanol facility in Great Falls and Montana Microbial Products, a Butte based company whose latest project is developing a process using barley for fuel and food.

The event is held each year the legislature is in session to network and visit about biofuels. Many legislators had questions about ethanol in regards to its impact on the price of food. Shirley Ball, Executive Director for EPAC in her remarks during the evening answered their questions by detailing the heavily financed campaign of the Grocery Manufacturers to discredit ethanol. She explained in part “Only the starch in the grain goes to ethanol” and “the rest of the grain, containing the nutrients of protein, fiber, vitamins, germ and minerals still remain in the distillers grain and is used in feeding programs.” Studies on the increased cost of food have shown that transportation and marketing are most to blame, with only 4% of increased costs being attributed to the price of grain. She went on to point out that the price for corn has fallen below the cost of production, but the prices on the food shelves have not come down. Corn is the feedstock in most grain based ethanol in the US, whereas in Canada, wheat and barley are major feed-stocks.

EPAC additionally addressed the food and fuel question in the dessert that was served with the meal. Cakes made with ingredients that included wheat distillers’ grains. Ball said as they served the cake, “You can have fuel and food from the same bushel of grain.”

January 12, 2009 – Washington – Today, the US Department of Agriculture released its final estimates for the size of the 2008 corn crop, confirming that American farmers produced the second-largest crop on record with the second highest average yield per acre in history. The yields and total production level are particularly noteworthy given the unprecedented adverse weather conditions that plagued much of the Corn Belt during the early part of the growing season and a later-than-usual harvest in the fall.
“January’s USDA report paints a very clear picture of the productivity potential of American farmers and dispels the misconception that ethanol is at the root of higher corn and food prices,” said Renewable Fuels Association President Bob Dinneen. “With an expected surplus of nearly two billion bushels at the end of this marketing year, it is clear that farmers can supply ample feedstock for food, feed, fiber and renewable fuel production.”
Dinneen added, “In addition, this report also demonstrates the real size of the demand for corn by ethanol production. At approximately 21 percent of the net total corn use, ethanol demand for corn is providing a much-needed value added market for farmers without having the market-distorting impacts many in the food processing and factory livestock production industries have claimed.”
USDA also released updated world corn supply and demand estimates today, showing slightly reduced demand for corn use for ethanol. Because of reductions in all corn demand segments, USDA dramatically raised its projection of corn carry-out (or surplus) at the end of the 2008/09 marketing year. At a projected 1.8 billion bushels, projected 2008/09 carry-out would be at one of the highest levels in the past decade.
The report also continued the trend of lowering expected prices, reducing the projected 2008/09 average price to $3.90/bushel. These trends – lower expected corn prices, lower expected use, and increasing available supply – are consistent with what the ethanol industry has been projecting and undermines the credibility of those claiming the ethanol industry was responsible for higher food prices as a result of increasing demand for corn used in ethanol production.
“The misinformation about ethanol’s role in higher food prices was a deliberate attempt to confuse and mislead the American public, who are still waiting for lower prices in the supermarket,” said Dinneen. “Now it is time to put this manufactured hysteria behind us and focus on what is important – ensuring a secure and sustainable energy future for this country in part built on the increased production and use of all types of renewable fuel.”

Adam J. Liska 1 , Haishun S. Yang 1 , Virgil R. Bremer 2 , Terry J. Klopfenstein 2 , Daniel T. Walters 1 , Galen E. Erickson 2 , and Kenneth G. Cassman 3
1 Department of Agronomy and Horticulture at the University of Nebraska—Lincoln in Lincoln, Nebraska 2 Department of Animal Science at the University of Nebraska—Lincoln 3 Department of Agronomy and Horticulture, also at the University of Nebraska—Lincoln

ABSTRACT
Corn-ethanol production is expanding rapidly with the adoption of improved technologies to increase energy efficiency and profitability in crop production, ethanol conversion, and coproduct use. Life cycle assessment can evaluate the impact of these changes on environmental performance metrics. To this end, we analyzed the life cycles of corn-ethanol systems accounting for the majority of U.S. capacity to estimate greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and energy efficiencies on the basis of updated values for crop management and yields, biorefinery operation, and coproduct utilization. Direct-effect GHG emissions were estimated to be equivalent to a 48% to 59% reduction compared to gasoline, a twofold to threefold greater reduction than reported in previous studies. Ethanol-to-petroleum output/input ratios ranged from 10:1 to 13:1 but could be increased to 19:1 if farmers adopted high-yield progressive crop and soil management practices. An advanced closed-loop biorefinery with anaerobic digestion reduced GHG emissions by 67% and increased the net energy ratio to 2.2, from 1.5 to 1.8 for the most common systems. Such improved technologies have the potential to move corn-ethanol closer to the hypothetical performance of cellulosic biofuels. Likewise, the larger GHG reductions estimated in this study allow a greater buffer for inclusion of indirect-effect land-use change emissions while still meeting regulatory GHG reduction targets. These results suggest that corn-ethanol systems have substantially greater potential to mitigate GHG emissions and reduce dependence on imported petroleum for transportation fuels than reported previously.

Dow Jones Newswires
January 23, 2009

CORN-based ethanol emits an average 51 percent less greenhouse gas than gasoline, according to a new study by the University of Nebraska-Lincoln in the US.
The study marks another page I the chronicle of the battle between the two fuel sources.
“Critics claim that corn ethanol has only a small net energy yield and little potential for direct reductions in greenhouse gas emissions compared to use of gasoline,” UNL agronomist and research tem member Ken Cassman said.
“This is the first peer-reviewed study to document that these claims are not correct.”
For every unit of energy it takes to make ethanol, 1.5 to 1.8 units of energy are produced as ethanol – earlier studies pegged the ratio at 1-1.2. Cassman said.
Old studies do not account for greater efficiencies in crop production, ethanol manufacturing and byproduct distribution, he added.
Factoring in energy use, greenhouse gases from crop production, ethanol conversion, byproduct use, and transportation, the study also found that 10-19 gallons of ethanol are produced for every gallon of petroleum used in the entire corn-ethanol production life cycle.

The research is featured in a Journal of Industrial Ecology article available online at http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.15309290.2008.00105.x.

November 20, 2008 – Washington, DC – The release of the Consumer Price Index (CPI) for October proves what too many Americans already have learned the hard way: input costs for food processors are way down but the prices they charge grocery shoppers continue to climb. Prices for virtually everything consumers buy – gasoline, airline tickets, clothing – dropped in October, except food prices.

According to a report, “Why Aren’t Food Companies Reducing Prices?,“ released today by the Renewable Fuels Association, the excuse for these prices hikes given by big food companies does not pass the smell test. Particularly when you consider that these price hikes are not necessary. Wegmans, a prominent East Coast grocery store chain, recently said no to rising prices charged by big food processors. By imposing price cuts throughout its stores, Wegmans estimates it will save their shoppers’ families between $40 and $60 per month. If such savings could be realized by every American family, they could collectively save up to $7 billion a month.

“Big food and livestock processors, led by the Grocery Manufacturers Association, have spent many months and countless dollars trying to convince Americans that ethanol is the reason their food bills are higher,“ said RFA Vice President of Research Geoff Cooper, who also authored the study. “Despite their elaborate ruse, they cannot hide the facts. Prices for virtually all inputs in food production have fallen dramatically while US ethanol production has risen. Yet, despite the drop in price for corn, wheat, soybeans, oil, natural gas and other inputs, the retail price of food continues to rise. At a time when Americans are counting every penny, the last thing they want is food companies trying desperately to shift the blame while raking in higher profits.“

The report details the dramatic drop in prices, noting:

“But now, five months after the “commodity bubble“ began to deflate, food prices remain at levels much higher than normal. The price for corn–the would–be scapegoat of food price hikes–has fallen more than 50 percent since peaking in late June. Wheat prices have plunged 55 percent from their peak, while soybean prices are down nearly 50 percent. And oil prices have fallen dramatically from their highs, resulting in a 50 percent reduction in retail gasoline prices and a 40 percent drop in diesel prices. This has all occurred at the same time US ethanol production has continued to expand.“

These “sticky“ food prices are rationalized, according to big food executives, because of the lag time that exists between when input costs fall and the retail prices follow suit. Yet, as the report demonstrates, the same “lag time“ is not present when input costs go up. This “rockets and feathers“ approach to pricing is very similar to what Americans have seen all too often at the gasoline pump.

“It’s time for some truth in advertising from big food companies about the real reasons for rising food prices,“ said Cooper.