Where the hell are they going to find the land to triple the amount corn. 15 billions gallons of ethanol would requires the total amount of corn produced in this country. Where are they geting the water and how big will be the dead zone in the gulf of mexico ? this bill is insane, a recipe for an complete ecological disaster.

Treehugger

This year’s US corn harvest is 13 billion bushels and currently the ethanol plants can make 2.8 gallons of ethanol per bushels. This conversion rate is increasing a little each year as new production technology is introduced. If the entire US 2007 corn harvest was used for ethanol it would give you 36.4 billion gallons of corn ethanol and enough distiller grains to make up for the missing corn that is used for animal feed in the US. Direct human consumption of corn is minimal. The rest is export which is also wasting energy in transport.

The sad thing about this law is that they actually limit corn ethanol. That is not needed at all. The market will limit it naturally once the demand for corn increases the price to the point where it is cheaper to produce ethanol from other feedstock. I still think the ethanol industry is for this law. After all it guarantees them an almost 40 billion gallon market at possible $2 a gallon or a $80 billion a year industry for ethanol alone. Then add distiller grains and a possible future market for CO2 credits for carbon capture and storage. It is going to be big business but it could be better. Moreover, the business will be big enough to do their own research that could lead to much improved economics in the future and ultimately cheaper fuels.

Because wind turbines and PV arrays don't contribute to pols.

Henrik

Do you think it is reasonnable to assume that 100% of corm production will go to ethanol ? I doubt that 2$ / gallon is relaistic, don't forget that given the amount of fossil energy you need to make corn ethanol, the price of ethanol will be tight to oil price...and all this just for 15% of oil consumption. In the same time a the current pace it will barely cope with the national gaz consumption increase. Biofuel shouldn't be allowed until the car mileage would have been drastically increased. Corn ethanol should only be authorised in car with better than 40MPG

Almost 50% of yearly energy use is consumed by buildings, and 76% of electrical energy use, yet what is the target of the bill?

Establishing building standards for all new building would have a greater impact than improvements in transportation.

Stop reading the headline and pay attention to the contents:

There are provisions for increasing efficiency in buildings (commercial and residential). There are mandates for DoE to produce new energy standards in a more timely manner.

They tried to push for a mandatory renewable energy portion and repealing tax breaks for oil companies but Bush stated he would veto any bill including these items and there was not enough support in congress to override a veto.

Patrick, good point. The bill did not continue energy credits (solar, window replacement, more effecient water heaters, etc) expiring in a couple of weeks, but it does start a study on the effectiveness of these programs!!!!

To the poster earlier though, the mandatory renewable energy portion was on utilities. Germany started a program for national renewable energy with a target of 20% (ours was 15%) and it looks like they are going to hit 30% (re: Nova program titled 'Saved by the Sun'). The German approach was to pay anyone for electricity (at above market prices - but not that much above peak pricing) produced. Now they have their own industry for producing PV panels and the cost is coming down.

Hybrid electic vehicles like the Volt will change the game, and if we look back on this bill in 2012, it will be seen in the same light we look at the bill for Trident Submarines passed in 1988, by those unable to see the future.

The sad part is this is about as good as we are going to get from our political system today. If Hilary is elected and there is still a Democratic Congress, a few more policies that got scrapped along the way, such as extension of the renewable energy tax credit, may make it into law. But given the intensity of political opposition to just about any useful policy, the real changes will probably have to emerge not from Washington and Detroit but from California, both its government and its entrepreneurs. At least serious capital is flowing this direction for the first time since the 70's.

I would like to know what the 100 members of congress that voted against this bill were thinking. Evidently they are not effected by high gas prices or do they want to be independent from foreign oil. 2020 seems like a long, long time. How many trillions of dollars will the oil companies make in the mean time. Couldn't the big car manufacturers make a car that doesn't run on oil and gasoline by the year 2020?

Real energy work was done in legislation in 2001 (battery research subsidies, and nuclear subsidies to fund GEN III+ standard designs), 2004, (funding the Last scientific Fusion and at the same time the First engineering experiment, ITER) and 2005, (reformed regulation for erecting and operating Nukes). This wasn't glamorous legislation but it was fundamental legsilation.

With all the real work accomplished, this bill is largely symbolic.

Much ado about nothing.

Irrelevant subsidies for bio fuels that are uneconomic but will buy votes. This generation's version of Carter's ill-fated Synfuels corporation, and about as enduring. Irrelevant mileage standards, for a hydrocarbon based auto fleet, that is already doomed to be augmented/replaced before the regulations bite.

The sane people had to throttle the renewables mandates for electricity that would have disrupted the planned modernization of the electric utilities.

That very delayed and necessary modernization is planned and in progress to provide the electrons for the new electric auto fleets. That mandate could have been extremely disruptive and delayed/doomed the coming of the electric auto, for a decade.

But sanity prevailed. Other wise the mischief is the usual political petty corruption; subsidies to rentiers; mostly farmers and bio fuels makers.

America has largely addressed and responded to the price cues of the oil crisis. For example the American steel industry has essentially been completely rebuilt on a much greater efficiency. Efficiency based on "mining" scrap steel and melting it in electric furnaces instead of starting with 3% iron ore.

The auto industry in America has rationalized and modernized extensively, using lots of energy saving processes. It manufactures more cars and trucks than it ever did, in mostly new factories, erected in the last 20 years, even if the name plates now includes numerous foreign names and innovations developed in many places in the world. The autos emerging from the factories are rapidly equaling the best in the world.

American GDP is up massively in the past 30 years, essentially doubling or more, yet American industries collective CO2 emissions are slightly lower or unchanged from the early 70s, such is the magnitude of the efficiency gains.

American CO2 increases come from more autos, driving more miles; and modestly more from the Commercial and Residential heating from more homes and offices. America has invested in more efficient houses and commercial establishments in the past 30 years. More insulation and more efficient furnaces and HVAC have all contributed.

Europe still believes in district heating with the losses that come from running steam pipes under the streets to heat many buildings, wanted or not. Co generation can be efficient but not as efficient in comparison as it used to be; and a lot less flexible or easy to modernize. Massive investment in conforming to revised building and appliance standards has had an effect also in the USA.

Even with the growth in autos and miles driven, the CO2 emissions have risen even as real pollutants have plummeted. World technology (and that is American technology) since we believe in Schlumpeter's "Creative Destruct" is rapidly advancing on a now technologically ready substitution of electrons for hydrocarbons in the transportation sector. And the electrons will come from splitting atoms rather than oxidizing hydrocarbons, and eventually from fusing atoms.

Even without the massive transportation conversion that is coming, North America is already a net Carbon sink. absorbing more CO2 from the atmosphere than it emits. If only the rest of the world was as successful.