-
Recent Posts
- Could sugar dumping push ethanol production up?
- Update to ‘IPCC systematically low-balling climate estimates?’
- Quality control in Excel spreadsheets- a serious and universal issue!
- The “future” of clean coal – is not in our future
- IMF report on energy subsidies, implications for a carbon tax & energy security
Share our stuff!

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.Archives
- May 2013
- April 2013
- March 2013
- February 2013
- January 2013
- December 2012
- November 2012
- October 2012
- September 2012
- August 2012
- July 2012
- June 2012
- May 2012
- April 2012
- March 2012
- February 2012
- January 2012
- December 2011
- November 2011
- October 2011
- September 2011
- August 2011
- July 2011
- June 2011
- May 2011
- April 2011
Categories
Tags
air pollution battery technology biomass combustion CAFE carbon tax CCS CDM cellulosic clean coal coal communication congress CSU development economics efficiency electric energy costs energy use EPA ERS ethanol feedstocks food fracking funding gas genetics geoengineering GHG ILUC investment LCA media modeling NSF politics public opinion Q & A R&D RFS statistics subsidies thermochemical waterContributors
Blogroll
Meta
Author Archives: Paul
Could sugar dumping push ethanol production up?
Pulling out an interesting little option from the 2008 Farm bill, the USDA is considering re-directing US produced sugar to ethanol production to drive up sugar prices. From what I understand, the US sugar industry is completely supported by farm … Continue reading
Posted in agriculture, policy
Tagged congress, ethanol, politics, subsidies, sugar, USDA
Leave a comment
The “future” of clean coal – is not in our future
A new report from the CRS reveals the sad state of what many believe is an impossible venture – “clean coal” that involves capturing the CO2 released as the coal is burned: http://thehill.com/blogs/e2-wire/e2-wire/293655-report-federal-clean-coal-power-project-faces-uncertain-future
IMF report on energy subsidies, implications for a carbon tax & energy security
IMF presents some new analysis of energy subsidies which I have previously wondered about. It is worth looking over: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/03/27/imf-want-to-fight-climate-change-get-rid-of-1-9-trillion-in-energy-subsidies/ $25/ton as the cost of CO2 seems low to me. $502 billion in US energy subsidies including this carbon tax.. I don’t … Continue reading
Posted in climate change, energy
Tagged carbon tax, development, economics, justice, subsidies
1 Comment
Nice summary of the RFS (and a new blog to follow!)
For those who are confused about RFS, RINs, and other acronyms in my last post, I found a great summary on a new blog that we’ll add to our blogroll. Seems like he is making some nice posts of the … Continue reading
Corn, ethanol, RIN prices, and the blend wall!
As we’ve hinted at before, some interesting things are starting to happen with high corn prices, high RIN prices, the blend wall and ever compounding RFS requirements! We all know that corn prices have been high – so high in … Continue reading
the rebound effect and how energy efficiency may not be the “low hanging fruit”
An interesting paradox: as we conserve more energy, we use more. We pointed out some research in the past on this effect, and some debate about the potential impact of this effect has surfaced in a couple places. First, there … Continue reading
The blend wall and what we will do with all the cellulosic ethanol
While we’ve discussed production issues with cellulosic a bit on this site (here and here), if John is right and we do scale up in the next couple years, whatever are we going to do with it all? http://farmdocdaily.illinois.edu/2013/02/ethanol-blend-wall-biodiesel-RFS.html They … Continue reading
Has biofuels led to major land use changes in the US?
And is the land that is being converted from grassland to corn and soy the “marginal land” that people take about growing dedicated bioenergy crops? A new article in PNAS this week seems to answer “yes” to both these questions. … Continue reading
updates on the court challenge to the RFS: minimal long-term impact
I like how this post by Judy Endres explains the recent court ruling “overturning part of the RFS”. The devil is in the details: Although the court rejected EPA’s approach favoring overestimation of projected cellulosic biofuel production, the RFS itself, … Continue reading
comparing original RFS volumes with revised volumes (some perspective)
Today the EPA released revised mandated amounts of biofuel to be blended under the RFS legislation. To put these numbers in perspective I have taken the original requirements for cellulosic in the 2007 law and compared to the revised amounts … Continue reading