|
New Energy Economics:
EPA Changes Biofuels Landscape
From Cole Gustafson, NDSU Agriculture Communication
With unproven biofuels conversion technology, changing EPA regulations and weak financial markets, new investment capital is going to be difficult to procure.
On May 5, 2009, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced proposed regulations regarding implementation of the 2007 Energy Independence and Security Act (EISA). Despite the legislation’s namesake, there isn’t much security for the growth of traditional corn ethanol.
EISA was landmark legislation for the biofuels industry because it set a national goal of producing 36 billion gallons per year of renewable energy. Following passage, a national debate ensued on whether our country had enough land available to produce this quantity of biofuels and its impact on food supplies (food vs. fuel).
The original EISA legislation defined three types of biofuels – conventional, advanced and cellulosic. Conventional biofuel is traditional ethanol produced from cornstarch (grain). Advanced and cellulosic biofuels were defined based on their ability to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Advanced biofuels must reduce greenhouse gas emissions by up to 50 percent, while cellulosic must reduce greenhouse gas emissions by up to 60 percent.
EISA included a specific column for production of conventional biofuels and eventually increasing production to 15 billion gallons per year by 2022. Advanced and cellulosic biofuels only included ranges of 5 to 21 billion gallons per year and 3 to16 billion gallons per year, respectively, because the federal government was uncertain how rapidly these new technologies could be commercialized. The legislation charged the EPA with reviewing and updating these guidelines annually.
The EPA now has provided more clarity. Conventional biofuels in the future must reduce greenhouse gas emissions by up to 20 percent. In determining this calculation, the EPA now includes both “direct” and “indirect” causes during the lifecycle of production. The latter component commonly is referred to as indirect land use change. However, the EPA finds that any new traditional corn grain ethanol plant would reduce greenhouse gas emissions by only up to 16 percent, so it would not qualify as a conventional biofuel.
In its proposed regulations, though, the EPA is grandfathering in traditional corn grain ethanol plants built before Dec. 19, 2007. Therefore, existing ethanol plants will be able to continue to operate and produce ethanol that conforms to the federal guidelines for the time being. It is uncertain how long this grandfathering provision will last, especially as new technologies arise and production of conventional biofuels with a greater than 20 percent greenhouse gas emissions reduction occurs.
Existing corn grain ethanol plants are investing in new technology, such as fractionation and changing plant energy sources, in an effort to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. In doing so, the plants increase their chances of being able to meet the tighter EPA regulations being proposed.
To ensure compliance with new EPA regulations, each gallon of biofuel produced will have a unique 34-digit renewable identification number. Blenders will have to document that they have purchased appropriate quantities of each type of biofuel when producing their final consumer products.
The greatest challenge the biofuels industry now faces is finding capital to construct new advanced and cellulosic plants. With unproven biofuels conversion technology, changing EPA regulations and weak financial markets, new investment capital is going to be difficult to procure.
Replacing Windows May Not Be Best Option
From Carl Pedersen, NDSU Agriculture Communication
Homeowners have several inexpensive ways to make their windows more energy efficient.
The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 has provided unprecedented tax incentives to encourage homeowners to upgrade parts of their homes to make them more energy efficient.
“But while these tax incentives are great opportunities for homeowners to cut the cost of home improvements and provide homeowners up to $1,500 to do things such as replace windows, homeowners need to educate themselves so they make the best decisions possible concerning home improvement,” says Carl Pedersen, North Dakota State University Extension Service energy educator.
Homeowners who are considering replacing windows need to first evaluate the need and determine if window replacement is the best choice for energy reduction. While windows wear out through time and are certainly a source of energy loss in most homes, replacing them is not always the most cost-effective alternative. Even the most energy-efficient windows still will allow energy loss from a home compared with a properly insulated wall.
Many times, homeowners can do a few simple things to reduce energy loss from windows. Those things often are free or cost only a few dollars, according to Pedersen.
Temperature fluctuations in building materials cause seals around windows to expand and contract, which will cause them to fail. Inspecting the seals around windows yearly and replacing any caulk or weather stripping that looks worn can be just as valuable as replacing an entire window.
Air infiltration, which is air leaking into or out of a home, can be a very significant energy waster. Replacement windows will have a rating to indicate the amount of air leakage the window will have.
Window coverings also can improve the energy efficiency of a home and can be very cost friendly if homeowners do the projects themselves, Pedersen says. Window coverings can reduce the amount of air that moves across the window surface as well as through the window. This will help retain heat in the winter and cool air in the summer.
In the winter, as the air around the window cools air next to the window, it becomes denser and drops. That air is replaced by warmer air from inside the home. This creates a convective current and can create a drafty feeling next to the window. A properly installed window treatment, such as a quilted shade, can reduce this transfer of air and make a home more comfortable.
Actions as simple as opening and closing window treatments also can reduce energy consumption in a home. In summer, closing window treatments on windows that face the sun can reduce cooling costs. In the winter, ensure drapes and blinds are open to allow the sun to heat a home for free. You might be surprised how much heat the sun can provide for a home, Pedersen says.
Window films are another cost-effective home improvement project. Homeowners can install the films themselves or have a professional do the job for them. A number of different films are available. Some films are attached to window frames and have heat-shrink capabilities. These types of films generally are used to add another layer that creates an air pocket to reduce the transfer of cool air and heat loss. They are fragile and not meant to last more than a season.
Other films can be attached directly to windows and are used to reduce the heat transfer through radiation. These films will block a certain percentage of heat passing through the window in the summer to reduce cooling bills; in the winter, they’ll help by reflecting heat back into a home.
An added benefit is that they also block ultraviolet radiation that causes furniture and fabrics to fade. If homeowners are looking to take advantage of tax credits, some of the window films qualify for the $1,500 tax credit.
“Be leery of advertisers’ claims to reduce energy bills by huge percentages as a result of replacing old windows,” Pedersen cautions. “While this may be true in some cases, oftentimes the cost to replace windows can take years to pay off in reduced energy bills.”
For more information on this or any other energy-related topic, contact Pedersen at (701) 231-5833 or carl.pedersen@ndsu.edu or visit the NDSU energy Web site at http://www.ndsu.edu/energy.
Attention WA State Kids: Outdoor Time “Needed”
From Mike Clifford, Washington News Service
Skipping rope, playing catch or just wandering around outside for at least an hour a day. That’s the prescription from the National Wildlife Federation (NWF) for Washington State children this summer. Many of them may be experiencing “nature deficit disorder” because they spend so little time outdoors compared to kids a generation ago. Kevin Coyle with NWF says the digital age is one reason for the shift indoors, with some studies showing children spend six hours a day in front of the TV or a video screen. (contd.) Podcast and entire story available: http://www.newsservice.org/index.php
Growing Nut Trees In Your Back Yard Or Orchard
From Judy Scott, Oregon State University
Oregonians who are love the variety of nuts that grow in the state, and would like to harvest their own every year, have the opportunity to grow butternuts, chestnuts, hazelnuts and walnuts in their back yard or orchard.
Detailed advice on how to do it is available in an Oregon State University Extension publication, “Growing Tree Fruits and Nuts in the Home Orchard” (EC 819), which is available online.
Before deciding to plant nut trees, ask whether you will have the time and interest to prune, spray, harvest and use what could become abundant crops. Also, consider the space needed and available soil.
“Large trees such as walnuts and chestnuts make good shade trees, but they’re more difficult to prune and spray than smaller trees,” said Jeff Olsen, OSU Extension horticulturist. “The soil must permit rooting to a depth of at least three feet. Too much sand or clay can be a problem, although some kinds of trees will tolerate extremes of soil texture.”
Here are some of Oregon’s most popular and common nut varieties.
Butternuts. The butternut tree closely resembles black walnut. It’s the most winter-hardy of all nut species, the most likely to succeed in poor soil and can be grown throughout the state. It’s an attractive landscape tree because of its gray bark and interesting tree form. The nut is pointed and oblong with deep ridges and in most varieties, difficult to remove from the shell.
Chestnuts. Also grown everywhere in Oregon, chestnuts grow into large, attractive shade trees that bear fragrant, creamy white catkins in spring. Nuts are enclosed in golden-colored prickly hulls in the fall. The nuts are delicious roasted fresh, but they mold easily in storage. Although the trees will bear some nuts with their own pollen, pollen from a second tree will often increase nut production and size.
Hazelnuts. Unless you remove suckers from the crown of a hazelnut tree every year, it grows as a bush. You can propagate hazelnut trees from rooted suckers, but nurseries usually can supply better trees. Every hazelnut variety requires another variety for pollination. To increase a tree’s productivity, prune out the older, more downward-hanging wood. Make sure to plant hazelnut varieties that are completely resistant to Eastern Filbert Blight, which has killed many trees. Examples of blight-resistant varieties include “Jefferson,” “Santiam,” “Yamhill” and “Gamma.” Hazelnuts grow only in the Willamette Valley and coastal regions of Oregon.
Walnuts, black. Black walnut trees grow rapidly into very large shade trees. The nuts are delicious but hard to crack. Like English walnuts, they’re subject to infestation by the walnut husk fly. Varieties available from nurseries usually have larger kernels and are easier to crack than seedlings. They grow only in the Willamette Valley and mid-Columbia and eastern Oregon regions.
Walnuts, English. Trees make good nut-bearing shade trees in western Oregon, but are subject to several serious problems. Early fall and winter freezes frequently damage or kill walnut trees. Early-blooming varieties are subject to spring frost and infestation of the husk fly. Hardy Carpathian walnut varieties can be grown in the mountain and high plateau areas of the state.
|
I Want My DTV: Groups Working To
Keep You Connected For Digital Television
From, Mike Clifford, Washington News Service
The big switch happens one week from today, when analog television screens go blank and a converter box will be needed to receive digital TV signals over the air. Jonathan Lawson, executive director of Reclaim the Media, says TV stations have been doing a good job explaining that the change is near - but the people who most depend on their old TVs with the rabbit-ear antennas are least-likely to know about the switch. He says some can’t afford the change that’s coming. “Free TV is a lifeline of public safety information and local news for a lot of people.” Podcast and entire story available: http://www.newsservice.org/index.php
Plants Could Override Climate Change Effects
By Michael Becker, Montana State University News Service
Scientists predict that global climate change will make many regions around the world warmer and drier, a factor which, taken by itself, would seem to increase the risk of wildfires.
But a new study led by a Montana State University researcher shows that changes in the types of vegetation covering an area play a major role in determining how often that area is burned by fires and could even counteract the effects of changes in temperature and moisture.
In the study, MSU earth sciences post-doctoral researcher Philip Higuera and his colleagues show that the risk of wildfires can be either reduced or increased by changes in the distribution and abundance of plants. The study will be published in the May issue of the journal Ecological Monographs.
“Climate affects vegetation, vegetation affects fire and both fire and vegetation respond to climate change,” Higuera said. “Our work emphasizes the need to consider the multiple drivers of fire regimes when we anticipate how they will respond to climate change.”
Higuera and his colleagues studied fire history in northern Alaska by analyzing sediments at the bottom of lakes, some dating as far back as 15,000 years. In the samples from the lakes, the scientists measured the abundance of different preserved plant parts, such as pollen, to determine what types of vegetation dominated the region in the past. Like rings in a tree, different sediment layers represent different times in the past.
The scientists then looked at charcoal deposits in the sediments to determine how often wildfires had burned over those soils. They compared that to the kinds of vegetation that were dominant at the time and finally looked at what is known about historical climate changes in northern Alaska.
The scientists discovered that, in many cases, changes in climate were less important than changes in vegetation when it came to affecting the frequency of wildfires.
For example, 10,500 years ago, the climate in northern Alaska went from cool and dry to warm and dry. The scientists found that the vegetation changed along with the climate, from flammable shrubs to more fire-resistant deciduous trees. As a result, there was a sharp decline in the frequency of fires.
Contrast that to about 5,000 years ago, when the area became cooler and wetter again. Considered alone, that would seem to decrease the risk of wildfire, yet the scientists found evidence of more frequent fires, a pattern they attributed to the development of high flammability spruce forests in the region.
“Climate is only one control on fire regimes,” Higuera said. “If you only considered climate when predicting fire under climate-change scenarios, you would have a good chance of being wrong. You wouldn’t be wrong if vegetation didn’t change, but the greater the probability that vegetation will change, the more important it becomes when predicting future fire regimes.”
Higuera hopes his findings will help predict modern changes in large-scale wildfire patterns as the world’s climate changes. While his work mostly deals with boreal forests, it still shows scientists that the effects of vegetation on wildfire is an important area for future study, he said.
“With global climate change, we’re going into a period where things aren’t going to be the same as what we know,” he said. “By looking into the past, we see a larger set of possibilities that will help us prepare for the future.”
Higuera’s research stems from a work funded by a four-year, $742,000 grant from the National Science Foundation, which was awarded to the University of Washington in 2001.
Higuera’s co-authors on the study include Linda Brubaker and Patricia Anderson from the University of Washington, Thomas Brown from Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory and Feng Sheng Hu from the University of Illinois.
Roadless Areas In National Forests
Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack announced today that he is signing an interim directive regarding inventoried roadless areas within our National Forests and Grasslands.
“This interim directive will provide consistency and clarity that will help protect our national forests until a long-term roadless policy reflecting President Obama’s commitment is developed,” said Vilsack.
The directive provides decision-making authority to the Secretary over proposed forest management or road construction projects in inventoried roadless areas.
The U.S. Forest Service, with jurisdiction over the National Forests and Grasslands, makes decisions about what projects can take place on those lands. In simultaneously upholding and overturning the 2001 Clinton roadless rule, the courts have created confusion and made it difficult for the U.S. Forest Service to do its job. The directive will ensure that USDA can carefully consider activities in these inventoried roadless areas while long term roadless policy is developed and relevant court cases move forward.
This interim directive changes procedural requirements for Forest Service projects in inventoried roadless areas. It does not prevent the Secretary from either approving projects that he believes are in the interest of forest stewardship or prohibiting projects he believes are not. The Secretary will work closely with the US Forest Service to implement this interim directive.
This interim directive does not affect roadless areas on National Forest System lands in Idaho - Idaho is exempt from this interim directive. Idaho developed its own roadless rule through the Administrative Procedures Act. That rule already prescribes how decisions with respect to forest management and road building in roadless areas in Idaho are to be made.
This interim directive will last for one year and can be renewed for an additional year
Family Ranches Prosper With Planning
From Amy Schneider, Allen Press, Inc.
Rangelands recently featured an article that addresses a topic many ranchers prefer to avoid: planning for ownership transition and management succession.
The immediate responsibilities of operating a ranch often make addressing long-term obligations seem impossible to tackle. However, the authors reveal that the benefits of planning far outweigh the inconvenience, and they offer some direction on what such planning entails.
For family ranch businesses to increase their chances of successful transition, they must identify their culture, vision and investment strategy. Although ranchers may argue that finding the time to do this is difficult because of the duties associated with day-to-day operations, the authors offer a strong argument that avoiding this task is done at the risk of business failure.
For example, if family members who will eventually be in charge of the ranch business do not understand how the business traditionally handles internal and external conflict, they may make decisions contrary to the established family-business culture and negatively affect the flow of operations. Not understanding the purpose of the business is another pitfall. Without a clearly defined vision, family members will not know how to make decisions and evaluate opportunities. Finally, having an investment strategy is crucial. It offers family members a blueprint for building the business and a clear picture of the finances.
Ranchers do not have to face these tasks alone. There are family business specialists who can assist, as well as tax consultants. Family ranches are much more likely to prosper in the long run if family members invest some time in planning for a smooth transition to the next generation.
To read the entire study, “Building a Vision That Drives Success and Transition in a Family Ranch Business,” visit http://www.allenpress.com/pdf/RALA31.2Building1551-501X-31-2-8.pdf
Rangelands is a journal of the Society for Range Management, an organization established in 1948 whose members are concerned with studying, conserving, managing, and sustaining the varied resources of the rangelands that make up nearly half the land in the world. The journal is published six times a year for educators, students, rangeland owners and managers, researchers, and policy leaders. For more information, visit http://www.srmjournals.org/
An Army Of Moths? It’s The Annual Miller Moth Invasion
By Marlene Fritz, University of Idaho
The University of Idaho and the Idaho State Department of Agriculture have received numerous calls during the last several weeks about an “invasion” of southern Idaho by a battalion of dull gray to light brown moths with lighter markings on their wings.
According to Jim Barbour, University of Idaho Extension entomologist at Parma, these moths are called “miller moths”—a non-specific term given to many types of moths that are abundant in and around southern Idaho homes this time of year.
This year, most of them are adults of the army cutworm Euxoa auxiliaries, which are currently migrating from lowlands to higher elevations for what Barbour calls “a few months of rest and relaxation.”
“In some years like this one, the moths are so numerous during their annual migration that they become a nuisance pest,” Barbour said.
As the miller moths migrate to the mountains, they feed on nectar during the night and hide in protected places during the day. In landscapes, they’re most likely to be attracted to cherries, cotoneaster, lilac, raspberry, spirea, syringa and Russian olive. In late summer and fall, they return to the lowlands, where they mate, lay eggs in a variety of broadleaf and grass plants—including weeds—and die. The eggs hatch into army cutworm caterpillars that feed throughout the fall, winter and early spring, whenever temperatures are warm enough.
According to Barbour, the caterpillars can be a serious pest of such agricultural crops as alfalfa and wheat as well as home-garden and ornamental plants. “In some years, populations are high enough that the caterpillars eat all the vegetation in an area, then move in mass—as an army of caterpillars—to plants in other nearby areas,” he said.
In about May, the caterpillars burrow into the soil and form pupae—the transitional life stage between larva and adult—and, by June, they emerge as new adults and begin the annual migration to the mountains.
To reduce the impact of miller moth migrations at home, Barbour advises sealing any openings around windows and doors, reducing lighting at night in and around the house and substituting non-attractive yellow lights for white lights. “Be sure to close doors to garages and sheds, too, because the moths search for dark places to hide during the day,” he said. If miller moths do get into the home, the easiest way to remove them is with a vacuum cleaner.
Barbour doesn’t recommend trying to control the migrating miller moths with pesticides, since they don’t stay long in a single place. They also serve as a “significant” food source for many other animals, including birds.
Although pesticides are available for controlling the insect’s caterpillar stage, Barbour recommends applying them only as a last resort. The best way to control army cutworm caterpillars in the garden and landscape, he says, is to control the grass and broadleaf weeds on which the miller moths like to lay their eggs when they return from the mountains in late summer and early fall.
|
