The committee debated the merits of the bill and a pair of amendments for about 45 minutes before passing the bill by a vote of 19-7. If passed into law, Sensenbrenner’s bill would delay the implementation of E15 by at least 18 months while the NAS conducts its testing. The bill allows for up to $900,000 of the U.S. EPA’s research and development funds to be used to finance the testing.

…Opponents, however, claim that Sensenbrenner’s proposal is little more than an effort to disrupt the EPA’s regulatory abilities and expressed confidence that the bill will not be passed into law.

… “Those of us in California and around the country do have concerns about corn-based ethanol,” Rep. Zoe Lofgren, D-Calif., said. “It’s a complex and important issue…but we should not stop the EPA from conducting its required activities under the Clean Air Act. To do so would weaken and undermine our environmental laws and procedures.”  READ MORE and MORE (DomesticFuel.com)

Congressman Pete Olson, R-Texas, recently introduced the Domestic Alternative Fuels Act of 2012. The measure seeks to modify the renewable fuel standard to include ethanol and other fuels produced from fossil fuels, like natural gas.

Renewable Fuels Association’s Matt Hartwig says it’s not only a misguided attempt to equate fossil fuels as a renewable, but to eliminate the RFS altogether.

“It is simply lunacy to suggest that a fossil fuel belongs in any sort of renewable energy policy in the country,” Hartwig said. “The fossil fuels industry gives these members a lot of money, they are job creators in their district and so this is pandering to a constituency. I think what is more troubling is this may be little more than a Trojan Horse attempt to try to open up the Renewable Fuels Standard on Capitol Hill with the ultimate goal being to repeal it completely.”   READ MORE

…Sen. Mary Landrieu, D-La., was the only committee member to devote a notable amount of her allotted speaking time to the role of biofuels in the domestic energy outlook for the coming years. She questioned witnesses specifically on drop-in fuels and their potential role in the U.S. energy supply. READ MORE

On January 30, Senator Debbie Stabenow (D-MI), chair of the Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry,announced the hearing schedule for the 2012 Farm Bill reauthorization. Energy and rural development will be the topics for the first hearing on February 15. Conservation programs will be discussed on February 29.  READ MORE

Now, at a rally in Washington DC organized by 350.org, Vermont senator Bernie Sanders has pledged to do something about that.

Sanders said:

One of the absurdities that foes on right here in Washington DC is that Congress keeps voting not for the interest of our children, not in the interest of our future, but for the profits of the huge oil and coal companies. … The most profitable corporations in the world do not need subsidies from the American people.

Sanders pledged to introduce legislation repealing federal tax breaks to fossil fuel companies, saying that doing so would reduce the federal deficit by over $40 billion over the next ten years. READ MORE and MORE (International Business Times)

From International Business Times:  However, while they have raked in massive profits, those companies have also spent immense sums lobbying Congress and federal agencies. In 2011 alone, the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics reports, oil and gas companies spent more than $100 million on lobbying expenditures.

Further, members of the U.S. House of Representatives received nearly $12 million from individuals and political action committees connected to the oil and gas industry between July 2009 and July 2011, according to another analysis by the non-partisan research organization MapLight.   READ MORE

“We have subsidized oil companies for a century. That’s long enough,” the president said. “It’s time to end the taxpayer giveaways to an industry that’s rarely been more profitable, and double-down on a clean energy industry that’s never been more promising. Pass clean energy tax credits and create these jobs.”  READ MORE and MORE (Biodiesel Magazine)

• Demonstration programs to convert former pasture land to either multi-crop perennial grasses, other energy crops or mixed hardwood forests for biomass/biofuel use.
• Development of portable biomass to biofuel precursors (sugars or oils) production systems that could make small, non-contiguous stands of biofuel grasses, oil seed crops or trees profitable.

Establish a National Biomass/Biofuel Policy: Using the “Billion-Ton” study as a starting point, a long term national policy should be established to assure that an economically and environmentally sustainable supply of biomass will exist throughout the coming decades. Elements of the policy should include:

• Multiple approaches that fit within regional ecological and environmental patterns
• Flexibility in harvesting patterns
• Ability to supply multiple biofuel and bioproducts conversion systems.
• Adaptations to changing climate conditions

Fund the Development of Biofuel Production Systems at the “Death Valley” Stage: The best use of the limited R&D funds that will be available in the coming years would be to drive the development of lab-scale breakthroughs past the first stage commercialization phase which is often referred to as the “valley of death.” Such a research to commercialization program would include the following:

• Project size should be limited to $5-7 million with a minimum of 30 project awards per year.
• Maximum cost sharing should be 15%.
• Projects should be focused on producing transportable precursors from a variety of non-food sources that could be used by a variety of biofuel and bioproducts production systems.
• Projects should be focused on decentralized or portable systems that would expand the availability of biomass crops to small and non-contiguous plots.
• Projects should be focused on optimizing biorefineries to accept these precursors and intermediaries

Provide a Grower-Oriented, Easily Accessed, Bio-Crop Database: USDA and DOE have acquired a significant trove of information on all aspects of biofuel production. In addition to current websites that access some of this information, a grower oriented website should be established. Features should include:

• Crop types and projected yields, nutrient inputs and related information based on grower supplied entries of location, size of plot, and soil type. (Precipitation would be provided from USDA/NOAA information in the database.)
• Available biomass conversion and/or biofuel production systems.
• Location of biofuel bioenergy production facilities and estimated transportation costs.

Reform Land Conservation Programs: Current land conservation reserve programs should be reformed to include environmentally sound biomass production options. These should include:

• Perennial Grass croppings that do not interfere with animal nesting patterns or other environmental conditions.
• Selective tree harvesting that does not interfere with animal nesting patterns or other environmental conditions.
• Current government payments would be replaced by a combination of income derived from the sale of biomass and tax credits. For example, if the value of biomass payments falls below established CRP payments, the difference would be made up with tax credits.  CRP land owners would keep any excess over the established CRP payment.  READ MORE (Biofuels Digest)

My goal is develop interactively with you, bioenergy thought leaders, a set of low-cost, industry-led policy proposals to be shared at the end of this year with the election winners as “An Open Letter to the President and Congress.”  To get there, I am interested in hearing what you may want to share or suggest.

My focus is post-election, because this year is frankly a transitional period of time, when progress on solving our national issues will be difficult and slow, as major elections loom to break (or maybe reinforce) political stalemates.  And, if the past such discussions are any example, we will need the bulk of the year to cut down the weeds and center a consensus around some solid policy prescriptions.

… Even in a dramatically-reduced spending environment, the next President and Congress must make choices in setting political priorities and programmatic direction.

…Our efforts should not be limited to just funding as so often happens in Washington.  It should also encompass reforming policy, regulation and even program efficiency (i.e., how well tax dollars are spent, measuring the ease, speed and costs to outsiders for participation.)  For example, can anyone defend how expensiveand cumbersome  federal solicitations have become?

…Think of it as a virtual experiment, maybe with some faint echo of the visioning and roadmapping undertaken in the late Clinton Administration for biobased products – – but this time it won’t be driven by Washington officeholders.  READ MORE

…ACORE’s subcommittee developed the definition using aspects of the 2008 Farm Bill. The goal is to unify all 16 current definitions in federal legislation, thereby simplifying policy progress for the biomass industry.

…ACORE’s biomass definition states:
“’Biomass’ is any organic material including:

(a) Materials, pre-commercial thinnings, or invasive species from U.S. Forest Service, National Forest System lands, Department of Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Department of Defense lands or public lands (as defined by federal law) that:

(i)are byproducts of preventive treatments or removed:

(A) to reduce hazardous fuels;

(B) to reduce or contain disease or insect infestation; or

(C) to restore ecosystem health and resiliency; and

(ii) are harvested in accordance with applicable forest management laws, rules and regulations, and

(b) From private land, non-Federal land or land belonging to a Native American or Native Tribe that is held in trust by the United States or subject to a restriction against alienation imposed by the United States, including

(i) residual materials, including

(A) crop residue;

(B) other vegetative materials and oils (including wood waste and wood residues);

(C) animal waste, bedding materials, and byproducts (including fats, oils, greases, and manure); and

(D) the biogenic fraction of municipal materials including all residuals segregated, after reasonably practicable efforts, from waste material, food waste, yard waste, and wastewater treatment plant biosolids; or

(ii) plant materials, including

(A) grains;

(B) other agricultural products;

(C) trees harvested in accordance with applicable forest management laws, rules and regulations;

(D) other plants; and

(E) algae, aquatic plants and byproducts (including oils).”   READ MORE

“There is nothing renewable about fossil fuels and they have no place in national renewable energy policy.  The RFS has been a very successful tool and remains very critical to the development of truly renewable fuel technologies, like advanced and cellulosic ethanol,” said RFA President and CEO Bob Dinneen.  “We shouldn’t be changing the rules of the RFS in the middle of the program because it is working.  It is reducing reliance on imported oil.  Scores of companies have made investments based on the program and new investments in next generation fuels will be chilled if the RFS is fundamentally changed before 2022.”  READ MORE