Trucks with a green hue? GM is in heaven.
What a difference three bucks a gallon makes. In the past year, General Motors has rallied state and federal support to get more E85 (an 85 percent ethanol, 15 percent gasoline blend) pumps at U.S. gas stations, launched a corn-hued marketing blitz, and announced that it is increasing production of its flex-fuel vehicles by 25 percent. Mary Beth Stanek, GM's director of environment and energy, talked to Grist about ethanol's role in GM's fuel portfolio, SUVs' bad rap, and future eclecticism at the pump.
How did E85 become one of the focal points of GM's fuel strategy?
I think it was sensing the market -- I'm talking the ethanol market and the volatility in oil prices. We started to notice that ethanol production was increasing rather significantly and that there were reliable firms making a great deal of ethanol. And we had a substantial number of flex-fuel vehicles in the car park.
The Big Three have gotten a lot of flak for pushing SUVs and trucks and vehicles with low fuel economy. Some blame that strategy for the downturn in their market share. Is E85 a way to counteract that?
First of all, not all SUVs are the same, and fuel economy is getting better in all classes. If you're really trying to offset fossil-fuel use, it's better to do it in our most popular models. And our most popular models continue to be SUVs and pickups. This is not to say [E85 is] absent from the other makes. We have E85 or flex-fuel in our Impalas, and we're going to be expanding to over 16 models.
I've noticed recently that SUV ads have started touting their gas mileage. How have things shifted as far as marketing fuel efficiency in automobiles?
There was a period a few years ago where you'd say it was a metric that was in the middle of the pack. Certainly price and performance and safety have always been very high. But fuel economy is right up there at the top for selection now.
What has been the response to E85 from government?
There are a lot of states like Michigan, Indiana, that are putting money up front [for ethanol infrastructure]. And once people get money up front, it makes them move a lot quicker. And then of course once [the pumps] are flowing, a lot of the state agency fleets begin to use those stations permanently.
Why do you think the states' responses have been so positive?
First of all, if they have ethanol in their state or they're planning on building facilities, there's job creation. But I also think there is a need and a desire for fuel diversity. And I think in some states, it's very advantageous from a price point standpoint too. When that price stays pretty competitive and doesn't move, that helps the consumers in the state and helps the governors as well because consumers aren't getting upset about the volatility of fuel pricing.
Do you feel as if there's some confusion out there as far as what is ethanol versus other biofuels, and how hybrids fit in to the picture?
First of all, not everyone is on the same page with ethanol. And there are some persistent areas of debate. One is food or fuel. The other is the net energy balance. There's a lot of relatively new research, but it's been triangulated and it shows these are not issues. The truth is that the net energy balance is still positive, especially as it compares to gasoline. With regard to food or fuel, most of the corn that's used in this is not for people anyway. It's for animal feed.
I would call [ethanol] the flagship biofuel. It's the fuel that's going to do a number of things: First of all, introduce the fact that there is a homegrown fuel, that there is some choice. Once people get used to that idea, you can begin to introduce the other ones like biodiesel -- but you have to tighten up the specs on some of these fuels, in particular biodiesel, to really get it going.
Where would you rank E85 on GM's fuel-efficiency portfolio?
It's one of the options. The importance of the improved internal combustion engine is going to continue -- lighter materials, better fuel economy. The other large vein of work is alternative fuels. And that's E85 and biodiesel -- so we're working on them both. And then we do have a very strong hybrid offering coming out. We have the Saturn now and we have the two-modes coming. All marching toward the hydrogen economy. We're going to have 100 hydrogen vehicles in the hands of consumers for testing and validation by 2008.
Out of all of these various strategies, what do you envision as the future of the automotive industry?
It will be very different than it is today. You'll see people getting their fuel, whether renewable or fossil fuels, from traditional retailers. In the case of hybrids, you may be getting your energy from the grid, or, in the case of hydrogen vehicles, from your home refueler. So it's going to be a very diverse fueling network and diverse portfolio of product -- and they'll all be coexisting.
Comments View as Flat
Biodiversivist Posted 8:37 am
15 Dec 2006
Future flex
"With regard to food or fuel, most of the corn that's used in this is not for people anyway. It's for animal feed."
The grain is being diverted from the human food chain. People eat the animals fed by that grain. Amazing.
Permalink
millercs Posted 12:08 pm
15 Dec 2006
Waste as feedstock for Cellulosic Ethanol
It is unbelieveable to me that conversion technologies (CTs) - like gasification, pyrolysis, and anaerobic digestion - were totally missing from your articles about biofuels. The feedstock - municipal solid waste that is not otherwise recycleable.
Using CTs we can cleanly produce significant quantities of biofuels and green chemicals, while cogenerating electricity. At the same time we will be reducing our need for landfills - which will reduce ghg and a major source of ground and air pollution.
This is happening. CTs already exist in Japan and Europe. Los Angeles has passed a comprehensive 20-year plan called "RENEW L.A." that will utilize CTs to cleanly convert 75-85% of its waste that is not currently being recycled into green electricity and biofuels. L.A.'s Public Works and Sanitation utilities are already developing outreach programs and RFPs for construction of facilities.
Forget all the drawbacks of cultivating feedstock - let's extend our recycling efforts by using CTs. Doing so will reduce urban blight significantly.
CTs can also be used to convert agricultural and forestry waste.
Permalink
Jason D Scorse Posted 2:07 pm
15 Dec 2006
Tom...
An overall very good summary. 2 quick points-
- biodiverisity is right- essentially all grain is for human consumption- 90% is wasted going through the guts of chickens, cows, and pigs
- you won't be surprised that I say we do away with all subsidies- if the fuels are efficient they should be able to compete on their own
J.S.Permalink
ioman01 Posted 3:40 pm
15 Dec 2006
Biofuels and Central America
Barclay's article on biofuels development in Central America and Brazil's role therein was quite informative and thorough, and I'll be referencing it my own blog. The only thing she left out are the efforts of the UN Economic Commission for Latin America & the Caribbean (ECLAC/CEPAL) to help the Central American nations design their biofuels and related policies.
Regards,
Keith R
Permalink
Orfintain Posted 11:01 am
17 Dec 2006
Check this out
http://www.greenfuelonline.com/
The above link is a company that sells algae that grows in smoke stacks. This is another carbon negative biomass source that although may not be able to scale super large, will still play a significant role.
Thanks Scott good post
and thanks to grist for working on the series
Permalink
nachovaca Posted 3:07 pm
02 Jan 2007
Bio fuels and drinking water
Hi,
I've been wondering about this since a friend pointed it out. Maybe it's just my ignorance of agriculture.
If bio fuels are made out of plants. Where will the water to water them will come? Won't that drain our drinking water reserves?
Thanks
Nacho
Permalink