Department of Energy Study Refutes Biden’s Ethanol Push as More Harmful for the Climate Than Fossil Fuels

  • The Environmental Protection Agency earlier waived a limitation on ethanol in gasoline blends due to its association with leading to more smog at higher temperatures.
  • But corn, despite being green, does not mean that burning it is ‘greener’ for the environment. Reuters reported on a U.S. Department of Energy and National Wildlife Federation joint study that showed that corn-based ethanol is “likely a much bigger contributor to global warming than straight gasoline.”
  • “The research, which was funded in part by the National Wildlife Federation and U.S. Department of Energy, found that ethanol is likely at least 24% more carbon-intensive than gasoline due to emissions resulting from land use changes to grow corn, along with processing and combustion,” the report noted.
  • The study explained why ethanol production is more harmful for the environment than burning fossil fuels. It boils down to energy density and land usage.


Biden Administration Declare National Emergency for Clean Energy Production, Invokes Defense Production Act to Facilitate Faster Transformation of Energy Economy Away from Fossil Fuels

  • [WHITE HOUSE] – Today, President Biden is authorizing the use of the Defense Production Act (DPA) to accelerate domestic production of clean energy technologies – unlocking new powers to meet this moment. Specifically, the President is authorizing the Department of Energy to use the DPA to rapidly expand American manufacturing of five critical clean energy technologies:
    • Solar panel parts like photovoltaic modules and module components;
    • Building insulation;
    • Heat pumps, which heat and cool buildings super efficiently;
    • Equipment for making and using clean electricity-generated fuels, including electrolyzers, fuel cells, and related platinum group metals; and
    • Critical power grid infrastructure like transformers.
  • Obviously, this massive shift in the governmental takeover of energy development is part of facilitating the aforementioned “Green New Deal.”  The approach follows a pattern that is transparent for those who are capable of accepting things as they are, not as we would wish them to be.
  • Joe Biden shut down domestic energy development, cancelled pipelines, cancelled leases, retracted the ability to drill in ANWAR (Alaska), and triggered massive new regulatory approaches from the Commerce, Interior and Energy departments.  The resulting increases in oil, natural gas, gasoline, electricity and energy costs overall – which became fuel on the furnace of inflation, have now created the energy crisis that Joe Biden is declaring a national emergency to solve.


Turns out Green New Deal isn’t green after all 

  • The untold story about “green energy” is that it can’t possibly be scaled up to provide anywhere near the energy to replace fossil fuels. (Unless we are headed back to the stone ages, which is what some of the “de-growth” advocates favor).
  • Right now, the United States gets about 70% of its energy from fossil fuels. To go to zero over the next 20 years would be economically catastrophic and cost tens of millions of jobs.
  • Some environmentalists are pointing to a little-noticed study by the World Bank showing that moving toward 100% solar, wind and electric battery energy would be just as destructive to the planet as fossil fuels. This was precisely the conclusion of a story in Foreign Policy magazine, hardly a right-wing publication.
  • According to the Foreign Policy analysis, moving to a “carbon-free” energy future “requires massive amounts of energy, not to mention the extraction of minerals and metals at great environmental and social costs.”
  • Here are some of the numbers. Going all-in on batteries, solar and wind would require:

— 34 million metric tons of copper
— 40 million tons of lead
— 50 million tons of zinc
— 162 million tons of aluminum
— 4.8 billion tons of iron

  • Those tens of millions of windmills, solar panels and electric batteries for cars and trucks aren’t exactly biodegradable. So, we will have the most prominent energy graveyard with toxic pollutants that will be 100 times larger than any nuclear waste storage. And yet, the Left is worried about plastic straws!
  • Then, the land space is needed for the windmills and solar panels. Bloomberg reports that getting to zero carbon by 2050 would require a land area equal to five South Dakotas “to develop enough clean power to run all the electric vehicles, factories, and more.”
  • In other words, the liberals are calling for a full-scale industrialization of America’s wilderness and landscape.