Barack on Ethanol again

In the recent issue of Rolling Stone, there is an interview with Barack Obama. The interviewer, Rolling Stone editor-in-chief Jann S. Werner, asks about Obama's position on ethanol.

RS: You've been a big supporter of ethanol. But studies show it doesn't do anything to reduce global warming, it's actually a less efficient was to produce energy than gasoline, and it's contributing to growing food shortages worldwide. Are you going to continue to back it?
BO: Corn-based ethanol I see as a transitional technology. We've got to invest in alternative fuels.
RS: This one is ranked pretty bad.
BO: I understand, which is why we're going to have a transition from corn-based ethanol to cellulosic ethanol, not using food crops as the source of energy.
RS: So you foresee this coming to an end.
BO: What I foresee is us transitioning into other ways of developing these energy sources. The fact that we had corn-based ethanol, and that industry has matured, provides us with distribution networks and infrastructure that can ultimately be used for other ethanol sources.

What to make of all of this? First of all, I had to look up "cellulosic ethanol," which is, according to wikipedia, a "biofuel produced from wood, grasses, or the non-edible parts of plants." Here is some more of what wikipedia has to say about cellulosic ethanol:

As of 2007, ethanol is produced mostly from sugars or starches, obtained from fruits and grains. In contrast, cellulosic ethanol is obtained from cellulose, the main component of wood, straw and much of the structure of plants. Since cellulose cannot be digested by humans, the production of cellulose does not compete with the production of food, other than conversion of land from food production to cellulose production (which has recently started to become an issue, due to rising wheat prices.) The price per ton of the raw material is thus much cheaper than grains or fruits. Moreover, since cellulose is the main component of plants, the whole plant can be harvested. This results in much better yields per acre — up to 10 tons, instead of 4 or 5 tons for the best crops of grain.

The raw material is plentiful. Cellulose is present in every plant, in the form of straw, grass, and wood. Most of these "bio-mass" products are currently discarded. It is estimated that 323 million tons of cellulose containing raw materials that could be used to create ethanol are thrown away each year. This includes 36.8 million dry tons of urban wood wastes, 90.5 million dry tons of primary mill residues, 45 million dry tons of forest residues, and 150.7 million dry tons of corn stover & wheat straw.[37] Transforming them into ethanol using efficient and cost effective hemi(cellulase) enzymes or other processes might provide as much as 30% of the current fuel consumption in the United States — and probably similar figures in other oil-importing regions like China or Europe.[citation needed]

Moreover, even land marginal for agriculture could be planted with cellulose-producing crops like switchgrass, resulting in enough production to substitute for all the current oil imports into the United States. [38]

I left the citation notation in so that you could get an idea of how much of that might actually be legit. Cellulosic ethanol actually looks decent so far. Wikipedia goes on to discuss how lots of paper, cardboard, and packaging which is sent to landfills could instead be harvested for its cellulose and turned into ethanol. This development could reduce waste sent to landfills, also a big plus. Wikipedia notes that it is estimated that cellulosic ethanol would cost about $1.90-2.25 per gallon; however, I'm not sure how many miles per gallon vehicles would achieve with that fuel.

Overall, this cellulosic ethanol is looking pretty good: reasonable to create, relatively inexpensive, and possibly reducing landfill waste. So the next important part of the equation is the green house gas effect. Here's what Wikipedia has to say:

In comparison to gasoline, ethanol burns cleaner with a greater efficiency, thus putting less carbon dioxide and overall pollution in the air. Additionally, only low levels of smog are produced from combustion.[51] According to the U.S. Department of Energy, ethanol from cellulose reduces green house gas emission by 90 percent, when compared to gasoline and in comparison to corn-based ethanol which decreases emissions by 10 to 20 percent.[47]

Not too shabby. Now maybe that page in Wikipedia was written by conniving cellulosic ethanol lobbyists, but I suspect that most of that information is accurate. It appears that Barack Obama is on the right track with cellulosic ethanol, and that he is isn't really pushing corn-based ethanol after all. However, there seems to be a lot of confusion on that point among the public and media.

As a side note, I just wanted to point out that George W. Bush actually advocated the use of cellulosic ethanol a few years ago in his State of the Union address in 2006:
"We must also change how we power our automobiles... We'll also fund additional research in cutting-edge methods of producing ethanol, not just from corn, but from wood chips and stalks, or switch grass. Our goal is to make this new kind of ethanol practical and competitive within six years."

At the time, I had never heard of switchgrass and had no idea what he was talking about. I'm not sure what has actually become of these promises. Apparently the US government has begun funding cellulosic ethanol production projects, but I have doubts that it is on track to reach goals by 2012.