MTBE phaseout: A boon for ethanol producers

minated the dinosaurs some 70 million years ago, he said. In as few as 50 years, we can expect to see widespread extinctions in fragmented habitats, w...
0 downloads 0 Views 3MB Size
MTBE phaseout: A boon for ethanol producers As the nation moves toward phasing out methyl tert-butyl ether (MTBE) in gasoline, ethanol is emerging as a potential replacement in reformulated gasoline (RFG). Such an outcome poses questions about ethanol producers' readiness to meet the expanded demand. Ethanol's use as an oxygenate in RFG is well established, as it is used in 17 states and Washington, DC. Its biodegradability in the environment, insist those in the ethanol industry, makes it a safer gasoline additive man MTBE. Terry Jaffoni, ethanol commercial director of Cargill, Inc., who spoke in February at the Clean Fuels 2000 conference held in San Diego, CA, discounted any problems associated with ethanol's solubility in groundwater, saying, "The only thing you are going to end up with ethanol in the water is a lot of happy fish." She noted also that because ethanol contains twice as much oxygen per volume as MTBE less ethanol is required to mppt

the oxygen requirement A recent U.S. Department of Agriculture report, Economic Analysis of Replacing MTBE With Ethanol in the United States, concluded that ethanol could successfully replace MTBE nationwide by 2004—with negligible effects on gasoline prices and no disruption in supply. In another recent report, Ability of the U.S. Ethanol Industry To Replace MTBE, John Urbanchuk, executive vice president of AUS Consultants, a consulting firm serving industry and utilities, found that the construction activity due to the switch to ethanol will add $11.7 billion to the nation's gross domestic product bv 2004 and create more than 47 800 new jobs At the Clean Fuels 2000 conference, Leslie Watson, an international energy consultant with Purvin & Gertz, Inc., cast doubt on ethanol producers' and refiners' readiness "to get into this MTBE-free environment". As EPA Administrator Carol Browner is urging Congress to amend the

vjiean /\ir /\ct to eliminate ivi i jjii from the fuel supply and to replace it with renewauie fuels, particularly ethanol (see accompanying story on p. 208A), ethanol producers need to make the necessary investment in expanding production capacity. "If we don't see any kind of investment from the ethanol producers, it could really drive the cost up [for oil refiners], come year-end 2002," Watson said. Jaffoni contends that the transition between MTBE- and ethanolblended RFG may not be as problematic as refiners envisage, referring to Getty Petroleum Marketing, Inc.'s recent switch to ethanol-blended RFG as "seamless". According to Tancred Lidderdale, refining industry analyst at the U.S. Department of Energy's Energy Information Administration, current ethanol production capacity is 110,000 barrels per day. If MTBE and other ethers were banned nationwide, an estimated 91,000 barrels-per-day ethanol shortfall would occur Lidderdale said. This estimate however does not include the 400-600 million gallons

The production of ethanol, a corn-based fuel additive, will likely increase with the phaseout of MTBE.

of ethanol that could be brought on line through plant expansions and new plants within 1-2 years, said Bob DeNeen, vice president of the Renewable Fuels Association. Despite the needed $1.9 billion investment, Urbanchuk assesses ethanol production capacity as more than exceeding the demand within two years. —LEONA A. KANASKIE

Quantifying the benefits of biodiversity could help prevent extinction A National Research Council (NRC) report that shows human activities are driving the nearterm extinction of between onethird and two-thirds of all species is among the most urgent warnings from scientists about the rapid loss of biodiversity. Nature and Human Society: The Quest for a Sustainable World, released in March, warns that loss of biodiversity could lead to ecosystem collapse, calling for immediate action to account for the full economic costs of resource exploitation. Human population growth and destruction of natural resources have boosted the rate of extinction of living organisms to somewhere between 1000 and 10,000 times greater than natural

background rates of extinction, explained Stuart Pimm, ecologist at Columbia University's Center for Environmental Research and Conservation and one of the authors of the NRC report. If current trends continue, this will be the sixth major extinction in the planet's history, rivaling the magnitude of the episode that exterminated the dinosaurs some 70 million years ago, he said. In as few as 50 years, we can expect to see widespread extinctions in fragmented habitats, with biodiversity in the tropics hit hardest, Pimm concluded. If we start throwing away the components of ecosystems, we will eventually lose their services, and "we're unlikely to duplicate

MAY 1, 2000 / ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY / NEWS • 2 0 5

A