Opinion: Carbon pipelines aren’t everything; other actions can help farmers, ethanol now

North Dakota Gov. Doug Burgum’s support for eminent domain for proposed CO2 pipelines ("Candidate Burgum supports eminent domain for pipelines," Aug. 1) is yet one more log on the fire of controversy surrounding this issue. I and the organization I lead, the South Dakota Farmers Union, applaud the governor’s objective of “raising the value of corn for every farmer in America.”

But assuming this is a make or break proposition for corn and ethanol ignores the more immediate opportunities we have at hand that achieve that same objective, without the divisive and bitter debate we are seeing now.

So many initiatives I see being proposed, such as more ethanol in aviation, marine use, or flex fuel vehicles, would require time to market and do little if anything to create immediate demand. Even if the pipeline issues are resolved, there will be little tangible benefit to any of us in the ethanol industry for years.

I’m all for long-term planning, but we need answers now. The U.S. ethanol industry has been facing pushback from many quarters in addition to landowner opposition to proposed CO2 pipelines. Among the issues: oil industry resistance to an E15 waiver, Renewable Fuel Standard legal disputes, export barriers in Brazil and elsewhere, electric vehicle market share threats, congressional gridlock, and more.

The good news is that not only can agriculture and ethanol play in this new world order of carbon reduction, but we already are. While additional carbon benefits are valuable, with or without the CO2 pipelines the U.S. ethanol industry already produces the cleanest, lowest carbon fuel available — the more we produce and use, the more benefits we enjoy at the state level and nationwide.

With gasoline prices once again strangling our pocketbooks, what are we waiting for? In short order we can get more ethanol into the pool and reduce carbon, protect public health, and lower gasoline prices.

The bipartisan Next Generation Fuels Act, introduced by Sen. Chuck Grassley of Iowa and fellow senators from both parties could provide the necessary impetus. A companion bill has been introduced in the House by Rep. Mariannette Miller-Meeks of Iowa.

This bill would immediately open the door to higher blends and capturing the carbon benefits Burgum and others are trying to help us achieve. By increasing the octane levels of gasoline, it would limit carbon intensive compounds refiners use to increase octane, and ensure a role for ethanol’s clean low carbon octane. It would require automakers to honor warranties for these higher ethanol blends and remove several regulatory barriers while correcting faulty EPA testing and emission programs.  The result will be cleaner, lower cost, high performing fuel in today’s cars without the massive disruption of converting the entire fleet to electric vehicles.

A recent article in Ethanol Producer Magazine ("Gazing Higher: The Quest for E30") illustrates the great strides being made using E30 blends in South Dakota and Nebraska. Emission reductions and improvements in efficiency from these high octane blends are available to us now. What should create a glide path for the Next Generation Fuels Act is the fact that most of the provisions in the bill are already required. And consider the fact that the Clean Air Act puts the burden on EPA to prove that a high-octane, low-carbon ethanol blend like E30 would have a negative impact on either performance or emissions. The law further requires EPA to reduce emissions “through the application of technology which will be available.”

E30 in existing vehicles offers that “available technology.” The transition to E30 from E10 could even help petroleum refiners. Using the same blendstocks they do now, gasoline blenders can easily — and at lower cost and with far less emissions — produce low carbon blends requested by automakers simply by splash-blending 20% more ethanol on top of E10. Consumers will save billions at the pump for a higher quality, cleaner-burning fuel, and farmers will benefit from added value to surplus corn starch.

Despite recent rules proposed by EPA that unfairly tilt the table to electric vehicles, EPA has acknowledged we will consume trillions of gallons of gasoline for decades to come. EPA must comply with nondiscretionary provisions of law and replace the most costly, toxic, and carbon-intensive fraction of gasoline. This transition can begin immediately in existing and optimized higher-compression vehicles, saving both automakers and consumers billions of dollars compared to electric vehicles. It will save the U.S. hundreds of billions of dollars annually in reduced oil imports, consumer gasoline costs, and public health expenditures.

The one-two punch of the Next Generation Fuels Act and EPA doing its job by enforcing existing law is a win-win for everyone. Ethanol plant netbacks would increase substantially — in part by avoiding the need to pay shipping costs to Brazil, China and other countries because we are essentially capped here at home. Farm income would improve, and the increased value that Burgum and all of us want can be achieved.

Doug Sombke is the president of the South Dakota Farmers Union.

This article originally appeared on Des Moines Register: Opinion: Pipelines just one of many opportunities for farmers, ethanol