digital knowledge database.com

Dear friends,

Next time you're deciding what to plant in your garden, you might want to think about adding a small section for the native bees. Here's a great article by my friend Susan Tweit in Audubon magazine. Many people are unaware of the numerous native pollinators.

The article makes it clear why it's important not to use pesticides in your garden.

While you're at it, check out Susan's website and blog.

It's still raining here, and many areas in the Texas Hill Country are flooding. It makes me happy that I'm up on a hill, but a bit leery about moving to town to "lower ground"....I need to get over there when the storm lets up to check out the drainage situation.

dig it!

bobbi c.

Energy Department Selects Three Bioenergy Research Centers for $375 Million in Federal Funding

Basic Genomics Research Furthers President Bush’s Plan to Reduce Gasoline Usage 20 Percent in Ten Year

WASHINGTON, DC – U. S. Department of Energy (DOE) Secretary Samuel W. Bodman today announced that DOE will invest up to $375 million in three new Bioenergy Research Centers that will be located in Oak Ridge, Tennessee; Madison, Wisconsin; and near Berkeley, California. The Centers are intended to accelerate basic research in the development of cellulosic ethanol and other biofuels, advancing President Bush’s Twenty in Ten Initiative, which seeks to reduce U.S. gasoline consumption by 20 percent within ten years through increased efficiency and diversification of clean energy sources. The Department plans to fund the Centers for the first five years of operation (Fiscal Years 2008-2013).

“These Centers will provide the transformational science needed for bioenergy breakthroughs to advance President Bush’s goal of making cellulosic ethanol cost-competitive with gasoline by 2012, and assist in reducing America’s gasoline consumption by 20 percent in ten years,” Secretary Bodman said. “The collaborations of academic, corporate, and national laboratory researchers represented by these centers are truly impressive and I am very encouraged by the potential they hold for advancing America’s energy security.”

To bring the latest tools of the biotechnology revolution to bear to advance clean energy production, the Centers will be supported by multidisciplinary teams of top scientists. A major focus will be on understanding how to reengineer biological processes to develop new, more efficient methods for converting the cellulose in plant material into ethanol or other biofuels that serve as a substitute for gasoline. This research is critical because future biofuels production will require the use of feedstocks more diverse than corn, including cellulosic material like agricultural residues, grasses, poplar trees, inedible plants, and non-edible portions of crops.

The Centers will bring together diverse teams of researchers from 18 of the nation’s leading universities, seven DOE national laboratories, at least one nonprofit organization, and a range of private companies. All three Centers are located in geographically distinct areas and will use different plants both for laboratory research and for improving feedstock crops.

The mission of the Bioenergy Research Centers will lie at the frontier between basic and applied science, and will maintain a focus on bioenergy applications. These Centers aim to identify real steps toward practical solutions regarding to the challenge of producing renewable, carbon-neutral energy. At the same time, the Centers will be grounded in basic research, pursuing alternative avenues and a range of high-risk, high-return approaches to finding solutions. To some degree, one key to the Centers’ success will be their ability to develop the more basic dimensions of their research to a point that can easily transition to applied research.

The Department’s three Bioenergy Research Centers will include:

The DOE BioEnergy Science Center led by the DOE’s Oak Ridge National Laboratory in Oak Ridge, Tennessee. The Center Director will be Martin Keller, and collaborators include: Georgia Institute of Technology in Atlanta, Georgia; DOE’s National Renewable Energy Laboratory in Golden, Colorado; University of Georgia in Athens, Georgia; Dartmouth College in Hanover, New Hampshire; and the University of Tennessee, in Knoxville, Tennessee.


The DOE Great Lakes Bioenergy Research Center will be led by the University of Wisconsin in Madison, Wisconsin, in close collaboration with Michigan State University in East Lansing, Michigan. The Center Director will be Timothy Donohue, and other collaborators include: DOE’s Pacific Northwest National Laboratory in Richland, Washington; Lucigen Corporation in Middleton, Wisconsin; University of Florida in Gainesville, Florida; DOE’s Oak Ridge National Laboratory in Oak Ridge, Tennessee; Illinois State University in Normal, Illinois; and Iowa State University in Ames, Iowa.

The DOE Joint BioEnergy Institute will be led by DOE’s Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory. The Institute Director will be Jay Keasling, and collaborators include: Sandia National Laboratories; DOE’s Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory; University of California - Berkeley; University of California - Davis; and Stanford University in Stanford, California.

Subject to the finalization of contract terms and congressional appropriations, the Centers are expected to begin work in 2008, consistent with President Bush’s Fiscal Year 2008 Budget Request, and would be fully operational by 2009. DOE’s Office of Science issued a competitive Funding Opportunity Announcement in August 2006 to solicit applications. The three Centers were chosen following a merit-based, competitive review process that included external scientific peer review of the applications.

The establishment of the bioenergy research centers culminates a six-year effort by DOE’s Office of Science to lay the foundation for breakthroughs in systems biology for the cost-effective production of renewable energy. In July 2006, DOE’s Office of Science issued a joint biofuels research agenda with the Department’s Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy titled “Breaking the Biological Barriers to Cellulosic Ethanol.” The report provides a detailed roadmap for cellulosic ethanol research, identifying key roadblocks and areas where scientific breakthroughs are needed.

Today’s announcement follows other key funding announcements this year to advance President Bush’s Twenty in Ten Initiative, and to make cellulosic ethanol cost competitive with gasoline by 2012. On February 28, 2007, DOE announced up to $385 million for six biorefinery projects that when fully operational are expected to produce more than 130 million gallons of cellulosic ethanol per year. On May 1, 2007, DOE announced a funding opportunity for $200 million over five years (FY’07-FY’11) to support the development of small scale bio-refineries that produce liquid transportation fuels such as ethanol. [snip]

[snip]

U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Public Affairs, Washington, D.C.

Source
[http://www.doe.gov/news/5172.htm]

Mornin' friends!

As part of my research into front yard gardens, I've been doing a lot of surfing. Just found this excellent article by Olivia Johns, Horticulturalist at the Calgary Zoo Botanical Gardens.

Alternatives to Lawns

I'm getting anxious to start my new garden in the new house. Yes, it will be different. For one thing, I won't be able to garden in my cotton night-dress anymore like I can out here. At least not in the front yard. LOL. And I'll have to take my neighbor's opinions into account...sort of. And then there are those outdated, pesky rules that some cities have that dictate what you can or can't plant in your front yards. (I won't go there today!)

Instead, I'm dreaming of espaliered apple trees against the side of the garage. And a shady grape arbor in the back corner of the backyard garden.

And a rosemary hedge by the street....in the FRONT.

And just for inspiration, here's a photo of what my front "yard' garden looks like now:



and my new front yard....Looks like I have my work cut out for me!



dig it!

bobbi c.

Dear friends,

I was excited to run across a website called "Food Not Lawns"

Started by author/activist Heather C. Flores, the group advocates and supports front yard gardens and other ecological projects. Hey, as the almost owner of a new front lawn, I'm all for that!

I for one can't wait to turn my water-wasting, gasoline-guzzling front lawn into a verdant garden full of herbs and flowers, and yes, maybe even veggies! Time will tell whether I run into any kind of ruckus by doing that or not...you never know here in Texas.

And as always, I'm inspired by the work of the Dervaes family in California, and their 1/5 acre homestead. If you haven't seen their gorgeous, amazing website, surf on by and prepare to be gobsmacked!

Path to Freedom

Until next time,

dig it!

bobbi c.

General Motors has alluded to the strong possibility that hydrogen powered fuel cell vehicles will be on the road in the USA for real around 2020.

According to Tom Krisher (associated press)

Larry Burns, vice president of research and development, offered the prediction this week as GM announced it has moved 500 fuel-cell engineers and scientists from the laboratory side of the company into the chain of command that actually produces cars.

Burns said he’s not yet willing to say exactly when hydrogen vehicles will be mass-produced, but he said it should happen before 2020, the year many experts have predicted.

“I sure would be disappointed if we weren’t there” before 2020, he said Wednesday at his office in GM’s sprawling technical center campus in the Detroit suburb of Warren.

GM’s organizational change, announced Friday, shows the company is confident enough in its research to take the step toward making the cars, Burns said.

“We’ve passed another milestone where we have come far enough in the development of this technology to start preparing for real production,” Burns said. “That’s a very significant milestone, in our judgment.”

The article cites obstacles such as lack of refuelling stations and storage capacity of hydrogen tanks as the main barriers to widespread adoption of the hydrogen fuel cell technology into the mainstream.

The move of the specialists into the production division is thought to be more than symbolic since a similar shift occurred, when it’s hybrid vehicles were in development. There are now 5 actual production hybrid vehicles available.

Good mornin' earthly gardeners!

Just ran across this most excellent site about composting. Actually, don't tell anyone, but it's about composting in NEW YORK CITY! Still, we'll ignore that bit of information and focus on the other stuff there. It's good information from the New York City Compost Project.

http://www.nyccompost.org/how/smallspace.html

It's all about how to set up a compost bin in a small space. Yes, it can be done!



Why am I looking at this, you might ask? Because I'm downsizing....my home, my gardens (sniff),my STUFF....and yes, dear reader, my compost bins!

Actually, I'm looking forward to the challenge of gardening in a small space.

If it weren't for that danged bermuda grass! arrrgggghhhh!

Dig it!

bobbi c.

Biorefineries - Industrial Processes and Products
Edited by Birgit Kamm, Patrick R. Gruber, and Michael Kamm.

Weinheim ; [Great Britain]: Wiley-VCH, 2006. 2 v. : ill. ; 24 cm.
ISBN 3527310274; ISBN 9783527310272

Table of Contents
Editors’s Preface.
Foreword (Henning Hopf).
Foreword (Paul T. Anastas).
List of Contributors.

Volume 1.

Part I Background and Outline – Principles and Fundamentals.

1 Biorefinery Systems – An Overview (Birgit Kamm, Michael Kamm, Patrick R. Gruber, and Stefan Kromus).
1.1 Introduction.
1.2 Historical Outline
1.3 Situation.
1.4 Principles of Biorefineries.
1.5 Biorefinery Systems and Design.
1.6 Outlook and Perspectives.
References.

2 Biomass Refining Global Impact – The Biobased Economy of the 21st Century (Bruce E. Dale and Seungdo Kim.
2.1 Introduction.
2.2 Historical Outline.
2.3 Supplying the Biorefinery.
2.4 How Will Biorefineries Develop Technologically?
2.5 Sustainability of Integrated Biorefining Systems.
2.6 Conclusions.
Acknowledgements.
References.

3 Development of Biorefineries – Technical and Economic Considerations (Bill Dean, Tim Dodge, Fernando Valle, and Gopal Chotani).
3.1 Introduction.
3.2 Overview: The Biorefinery Model.
3.3 Feedstock and Conversion to Fermentable Sugar.
3.4 Technical Challenges.
3.5 Conclusions.
Acknowledgments.
References.

4 Biorefineries for the Chemical Industry – A Dutch Point of View (Ed de Jong, René van Ree Rea, Robert van Tuil, and Wolter Elbersen).
4.1 Introduction.
4.2 Historical Outline – The Chemical Industry: Current Situation and
Perspectives.
4.3 Biomass: Technology and Sustainability.
4.4 The Chemical Industry: Biomass Opportunities – Biorefineries.
4.5 Conclusions, Outlook, and Perspectives.
References.

Part II Biorefinery Systems.

Lignocellulose Feedstock Biorefinery.

5 The Lignocellulosic Biorefinery – A Strategy for Returning to a Sustainable Source of Fuels and Industrial Organic Chemicals (L. Davis Clements and Donald L. Van Dyne).
5.1 The Situation.
5.2 The Strategy.
5.3 Comparison of Petroleum and Biomass Chemistry.
5.4 The Chemistry of the Lignocellulosic Biorefinery.
5.5 Examples of Integrated Biorefinery Applications.
5.6 Summary.
References.

6 Lignocellulosic Feedstock Biorefinery: History and Plant Development for Biomass Hydrolysis (Raphael Katzen and Daniel J. Schell).
6.1 Introduction.
6.2 Hydrolysis of Biomass Materials.
6.3 Acid Hydrolysis Processes.
6.4 Enzymatic Hydrolysis Process.
6.5 Conclusion.
References.

7 The Biofine Process – Production of Levulinic Acid, Furfural, and Formic Acid from Lignocellulosic Feedstocks (Daniel J. Hayes, Steve Fitzpatrick, Michael H.B. Hayes, and Julian R.H. Ross).
7.1 Introduction.
7.2 Lignocellulosic Fractionation.
7.3 The Biofine Process.
7.4 Conclusion.
References.

Whole Crop Biorefinery.

8 A Whole Crop Biorefinery System: A Closed System for the Manufacture of Non-food Products from Cereals (Apostolis A. Koutinas, Rouhang Wang, Grant M. Campbell, and Colin Webb).
8.1 Intro.
8.2 Biorefineries Based on Wheat.
8.3 A Biorefinery Based on Oats.
8.4 Summary.
References.

Fuel-oriented Biorefineries.

9 Iogen’s Demonstration Process for Producing Ethanol from Cellulosic Biomass (Jeffrey S. Tolan).
9.1 Introduction.
9.2 Process Overview.
9.3 Feedstock Selection.
9.4 Pretreatment.
9.5 Cellulase Enzyme Production.
9.6 Cellulose Hydrolysis.
9.7 Lignin Processing.
9.8 Sugar Fermentation and Ethanol Recovery.
References.

10 Sugar-based Biorefinery – Technology for Integrated Production of Poly(3-hydroxybutyrate), Sugar, and Ethanol(Carlos Eduardo Vaz Rossell, Paulo E. Mantelatto, José A.M. Agnelli, and Jefter Nascimento).
10.1 Introduction.
10.2 Sugar Cane Agro Industry in Brazil – Historical Outline.
10.3 Biodegradable Plastics from Sugar Cane.
10.4 Poly(3-Hydroxybutyric Acid) Production Process.
10.5 Outlook and Perspectives.
References.

Biorefineries Based on Thermochemical Processing.

11 Biomass Refineries Based on Hybrid Thermochemical-Biological Processing – An Overview (Robert C. Brown).
11.1 Introduction.
11.2 Historical Outline.
11.3 Gasification-Based Systems.
11.4 Fast Pyrolysis-based Systems.
11.5 Outlook and Perspectives.
References.

Green Biorefineries.

12 The Green Biorefiner Concept – Fundamentals and Potential (Stefan Kromus, Birgit Kamm, Michael Kamm, Paul Fowler, and Michael Narodoslawsky).
12.1 Introduction.
12.2 Historical Outline.
12.3 Green Biorefinery Raw Materials.
12.4 Green Biorefinery Concept.
12.5 Processes and Products.
12.6 Green Biorefinery – Economic and Ecological Aspects.
12.7 Outlook and Perspectives.
Acknowledgment.
References.

13 Plant Juice in the Biorefinery – Use of Plant Juice as Fermentation Medium (Margrethe Andersen, Pauli Kiel, and Mette Hedegaard Thomsen).
13.1 Introduction.
13.2 Historical Outline.
13.3 Biobased Poly(lactic Acid).
13.4 Materials and Methods.
13.5 Brown Juice.
13.6 Potato Juice.
13.7 Carbohydrate Source.
13.8 Purification of Lactic Acid.
13.9 Conclusion and Outlook.
Acknowledgments.
References.

Part III Biomass Production and Primary Biorefineries.

14 Biomass Commercialization and Agriculture Residue Collection (James Hettenhaus).
14.1 Introduction.
14.2 Historical Outline.
14.3 Biomass Value.
14.4 Sustainable Removal.
14.5 Innovative Methods for Collection, Storage and Transport.
14.6 Establishing Feedstock Supply.
14.7 Perspectives and Outlook.
References.

15 The Corn Wet Milling and Corn Dry Milling Industry – A Base for Biorefinery Technology Developments (Donald L. Johnson).
15.1 Introduction.
15.2 The Corn Refinery.
15.3 The Modern Corn Refinery.
15.4 Carbohydrate Refining.
15.5 Outlook and Perspectives.
References.

Part IV Biomass Conversion: Processes and Technologies.

16 Enzymes for Biorefineries (Sarah A. Teter, Feng Xu, Glenn E. Nedwin, and Joel R. Cherry).
16.1 Introduction.
16.2 Biomass as a Substrate.
16.3 Enzymes Involved in Biomass Biodegradation.
16.4 Cellulase Development for Biomass Conversion.
16.5 Expression of Cellulases.
16.6 Range of Biobased Products.
16.7 Biorefineries: Outlook and Perspectives.
References.

17 Biocatalytic and Catalytic Routes for the Production of Bulk and Fine Chemicals from Renewable Resources (Thomas Willke, Ulf Prüße, and Klaus-Dieter Vorlop).
17.1 Introduction.
17.2 Historical Outline.
17.3 Processes.
References.

Subject Index.

Volume 2.

Part I Biobased Product Family Trees.

Carbohydrate-based Product Lines.
1 The Key Sugars of Biomass: Availability, Present Non-Food Uses and Potential Future Development Lines(Frieder W. Lichtenthaler).
2 Industrial Starch Platform – Status quo of Production, Modification and Application (Dietmar R. Grüll, Franz Jetzinger, Martin Kozich, Marnik M. Wastyn, and Robert Wittenberger).
3 Lignocellulose-based Chemical Products and Product Family Trees (Birgit Kamm, Michael Kamm, Matthias Schmidt, Thomas Hirth, and Margit Schulze).

Lignin Line and Lignin-based Product Family Trees.
4 Lignin Chemistry and its Role in Biomass Conversion (Gösta Brunow).
5 Industrial Lignin Production and Applications (E. Kendall Pye).

Protein Line and Amino Acid-based Product Family Trees.
6 Towards Integration of Biorefinery and Microbial Amino Acid Production (Achim Marx, Volker F. Wendisch, Ralf Kelle, and Stefan Buchholz).
7 Protein-based Polymers: Mechanistic Foundations for Bioproduction and Engineering (Dan W. Urry).

Biobased Fats (Lipids) and Oils.
8 New Syntheses with Oils and Fats as Renewable Raw Materials for the Chemical Industry (Ursula Biermann, Wolfgang Friedt, Siegmund Lang, Wilfried Lühs, Guido Machmüller, Jürgen O. Metzger, Mark Rüsch gen. Klaas, Hans J. Schäfer, Manfred P. Schneider).
9 Industrial Development and Application of Biobased Oleochemicals (Karlheinz Hill).

Special Ingredients and Subsequent Products.
10 Phytochemicals, Dyes, and Pigments in the Biorefinery Context (George A. Kraus).
11 Adding Color to Green Chemistry?
An Overview of the Fundamentals and Potential of Chlorophylls (Mathias O. Senge and Julia Richter).

Part II Biobased Industrial Products, Materials and Consumer Products.

12 Industrial Chemicals from Biomass – Industrial Concepts (Johan Thoen and Rainer Busch).
13 Succinic Acid – A Model Building Block for Chemical Production from Renewable Resources (Todd Werpy, John Frye, and John Holladay).
14 Polylactic Acid from Renewable Resources (Patrick Gruber, David E. Henton, and Jack Starr).
15 Biobased Consumer Products for Cosmetics (Thomas C. Kripp).

Part III Biobased Industry: Economy, Commercialization and Sustainability.

16 Industrial Biotech – Setting Conditions to Capitalize on the Economic Potential (Rolf Bachmann and Jens Riese).

Subject Index.

Table of Contents
[http://tinyurl.com/ys9lqt]

Index
[http://tinyurl.com/yu2xzv]

Chapter 1 Excerpt [Part I. Background and Outline Principles and Fundamentals]
[http://tinyurl.com/yskjth]

Source
[http://tinyurl.com/22qm9l]

Book Review
[http://tinyurl.com/2dldn2]

Open WorldCat
[http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/63184883]

Ethanol Expansion in the United States: How Will the Agricultural Sector Adjust?

By Paul Westcott | Washington, D.C.: USDA Economic Research Service, 2007.
Outlook Report No. (FDS-07D-01) 20 pp, May 2007

Introduction
Ethanol production in the United States totaled almost 5 billion gallons in 2006, about 1 billion gallons more than in 2005. While this was a significant increase, further expansion in the industry is continuing, with production expected to exceed 10 billion gallons by 2009. This large and rapid expansion of U.S. ethanol production affects virtually every aspect of the field crops sector, ranging from domestic demand and exports to prices and the allocation of acreage among crops. Many aspects of the livestock sector are affected too. As a consequence of these commodity market impacts, farm income, government payments, and food prices also change. Adjustments in the agricultural sector are already underway and will continue for many years as interest grows in renewable sources of energy to lessen dependence on foreign oil.

Full Text Available
[http://tinyurl.com/2hrfnu]

Slide Show
[http://www.ers.usda.gov/multimedia/EthanolMay2007/]

Slide Show Transcript
[http://www.ers.usda.gov/multimedia/ethanolmay2007/Ethanol.pdf]

Emerging Biofuels: Outlook of Effects on U.S. Grain, Oilseed, and Livestock Markets

Simla Tokgoz, Amani Elobeid, Jacinto F. Fabiosa, Dermot J. Hayes, Bruce A. Babcock, Tun-Hsiang (Edward) Yu, Fengxia Dong, Chad E. Hart, John C. Beghin
| Center for Agriculture and Rural Development (CARD) | May 2007 | 07-SR 101 |

Projections of U.S. ethanol production and its impacts on planted acreage, crop prices, livestock production and prices, trade, and retail food costs are presented under the assumption that current tax credits and trade policies are maintained. The projections were made using a multi-product, multi-country deterministic partial equilibrium model. The impacts of higher oil prices, a drought combined with an ethanol mandate, and removal of land from the Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) relative to baseline projections are also presented.

The results indicate that expanded U.S. ethanol production will cause long-run crop prices to increase. In response to higher feed costs, livestock farmgate prices will increase enough to cover the feed cost increases. Retail meat, egg, and dairy prices will also increase. If oil prices are permanently $10-per-barrel higher than assumed in the baseline projections, U.S. ethanol will expand significantly. The magnitude of the expansion will depend on the future makeup of the U.S. automobile fleet. If sufficient demand for E-85 from flex-fuel vehicles is available, corn-based ethanol production is projected to increase to over 30 billion gallons per year with the higher oil prices. The direct effect of higher feed costs is that U.S. food prices would increase by a minimum of 1.1% over baseline levels. Results of a model of a 1988-type drought combined with a large mandate for continued ethanol production show sharply higher crop prices, a drop in livestock production, and higher food prices. Corn exports would drop significantly, and feed costs would rise. Wheat feed use would rise sharply. Taking additional land out of the CRP would lower crop prices in the short run. But because long-run corn prices are determined by ethanol prices and not by corn acreage, the long-run impacts on commodity prices and food prices of a smaller CRP are modest.

Cellulosic ethanol from switchgrass and biodiesel from soybeans do not become economically viable in the Corn Belt under any of the scenarios. This is so because high energy costs that increase the prices of biodiesel and switchgrass ethanol also increase the price of corn-based ethanol. So long as producers can choose between soybeans for biodiesel, switchgrass for ethanol, and corn for ethanol, they will choose to grow corn. Cellulosic ethanol from corn stover does not enter into any scenario because of the high cost of collecting and transporting corn stover over the large distances required to supply a commercial-sized ethanol facility.

Full Text Available
[http://www.card.iastate.edu/publications/DBS/PDFFiles/07sr101.pdf]

Appendix B: Scenario Results [889 pp.]
[http://www.card.iastate.edu/publications/DBS/PDFFiles/07sr101_appendix-b.pdf]

Source
[http://www.card.iastate.edu/publications/synopsis.aspx?id=1050]

Ethanol and Biofuels: Agriculture,Infrastructure, and Market Constraints Related to Expanded Production

| Brent D. Yacobucci, Specialist in Energy Policy, Resources, Science, and Industry Division | Randy Schnepf, Specialist in Agricultural Policy Resources, Science, and Industry Division | Congessional Research Service | March 16, 2007 | RL33928 |

Summary:
High petroleum and gasoline prices, concerns over global climate change, and the desire to promote domestic rural economies have greatly increased interest in biofuels as an alternative to petroleum in the U.S. transportation sector. Biofuels, most notably corn-based ethanol, have grown significantly in the past few years as a component of U.S. motor fuel supply. Ethanol, the most commonly used biofuel, is blended in nearly half of all U.S. gasoline (at the 10% level or lower in most cases). However, current biofuel supply represents less than 4% of total gasoline demand. While recent proposals have set the goal of significantly expanding biofuel supply in the coming decades, questions remain about the ability of the U.S. biofuel industry to meet rapidly increasing demand. Current U.S. biofuel supply relies almost exclusively on ethanol produced from Midwest corn. In 2006, 17% of the U.S. corn crop was used for ethanol production.

To meet some of the higher ethanol production goals would require more corn than the United States currently produces, if all of the envisioned ethanol was made from corn. Due to the concerns with significant expansion in corn-based ethanol supply, interest has grown in expanding the market for biodiesel produced from soybeans and other oil crops. However, a significant increase in U.S. biofuels would likely require a movement away from food and grain crops. Other biofuel feedstock sources, including cellulosic biomass, are promising, but technological barriers make their future uncertain. Issues facing the U.S. biofuels industry include potential agricultural "feedstock" supplies, and the associated market and environmental effects of a major shift in U.S. agricultural production; the energy supply needed to grow feedstocks and process them into fuel; and barriers to expanded infrastructure needed to deliver more and more biofuels to the market.

This report outlines some of the current supply issues facing biofuels industries, including the limitations on agricultural feedstocks, infrastructure constraints, energy supply for biofuel production, and fuel price uncertainties.

Conclusion
There is continuing interest in expanding the U.S. biofuel industry as a strategy for promoting energy security and environmental goals. However, there are limits to the amount of biofuels that can be produced and questions about the net energy and environmental benefits they would provide. Further, rapid expansion of biofuel production may have many unintended and undesirable consequences for agricultural commodity costs, fossil energy use, and environmental degradation. As policies are implemented to promote ever-increasing use of biofuels, the goal of replacing petroleum use with agricultural products must be weighed against these other potential consequences.

Contents
Introduction ..... 1
Issues with Corn-Based Ethanol Supply ..... 3
Overview of Long-Run Corn Ethanol Supply Issues ..... 3
Agricultural Issues ..... 4
Feed Markets ..... 5
Exports .... 5
Food vs. Fuel ..... 6
Energy Supply Issues ..... 6
Energy Balance ..... 6
Natural Gas Demand ..... 7
Energy Security ..... 7
Infrastructure and Distribution Issues ..... 8
Distribution Issues ..... 8
Higher-Level Ethanol Blends .... 9
Sugar Ethanol ..... 10
Biodiesel ..... 11
Cellulosic Biofuels ..... 11
Conclusion ..... 12

List of Tables
Table 1. U.S. Production of Biofuels from Various Feedstocks .... 3

Source
[http://www.nationalaglawcenter.org/assets/crs/RL33928.pdf]