The Geologic History of Kansas by Daniel F. Merriam

http://www.kgs.ku.edu/Publications/Bulletins/162/index.html

Montgomery County................................


Click in the geologic map to zoom in and view more detail.


http://www.kgs.ku.edu/General/Geology/County/klm/montgom.html

Woodson County..........................................

Click in the geologic map to zoom in and view more detail.


http://www.kgs.ku.edu/General/Geology/County/tw/woodson.html

Pages 56-58, transcribed by Carolyn Ward from History of Allen and Woodson Counties, Kansas


"The fame of the new discovery spread rapidly, and in June, 1894, the Palmer Oil and Gas Company, of Cleveland, Ohio, sent representatives to Iola, leased several thousand acres of land and proceeded at once to sink a number of wells. In nearly all of these wells gas was found, the rock pressure in each varying but slightly from 320 pounds, the volume ranging from 3,000,000 to 14,000,000 cubic feet daily, and the depth at which the "sand" was found varying from 810 to 996 feet. The success of the Palmer Company attracted other investors, and within four years from the date of the original discovery the field had been practically outlined in the form of a parallelogram extending from Iola eastward a distance of about eight miles, with a width of about four miles."

"A number of wells have been drilled in the vicinity of Humboldt and gas enough has been found to supply the town with fuel and light for domestic purposes and for manufacturing to a limited extent. Nearly all the Humboldt wells have shown considerable oil and there seems good ground for the opinion that a profitable oil field may some day be developed there."






http://skyways.lib.ks.us/genweb/archives/allen/history/1901/56.html

http://sec.freeedgar.com/resultsFilings.asp?ID=6588

Is wechoose and fairwayiron the same person?

YES

Ironic thing about the "magic" description. That was the exact word that Dr. Lassoie used to describe the eye-witnessed process.

http://www.ussec.us/research.html


http://www.ussec.us/content/resources/pre1.wmv
http://www.ussec.us/content/resources/2a.wmv

I am reminded of an exchange in the movie Aviator.

Howard Hughs talking to the family of Katherine Hepburn:

"Then how did you make all that money?
We don't care about money here.

Well, that's because you have it.

Would you repeat that?

You don't care about money
because you've always had it.

You're sailing in a yatch to where?

"Congrats to the few who know what I am talking about. I am in total awe of the person who is the architect of this creation. I have a pretty good idea of where we are headed from here and it should be an amazing voyage."

Stepping outside of your Batman riddle/Rosetta Stone for a minute, a related question. IYO will this voyage be profitable
for anyone in a dollar sense??

You're not in the blackhole yet or did you find a hotspot??

What reason would there be to have a private and public Sustainable Power Corp.? Just my opinion for dissolving the private entity. Maybe I misspoke?

November 22, 2006

Mr. Smith was educated at Mississippi State University receiving a B.S. in mechanical engineering with honors. While at MSU Mr. Smith received the Sylvia W. Farney Scholarship presented by the American Society of Mechanical Engineers Auxiliary, Inc., one of four recipients nationwide. He began his business career with Mississippi Power as a co-op student in their marketing department. Upon graduation, Mr. Smith worked for Exxon USA in their Baton Rouge, LA, Refinery, the second largest refinery in the world. While at Exxon Mr. Smith served as a project engineer as well as a mechanical engineer for several refinery processes. In order to return to Mississippi, Mr. Smith left Exxon to work for Cataphote Inc. as a project manager and then Entergy Corporation at the Grand Gulf Nuclear Station. While at Entergy, Mr. Smith worked as a design engineer, scheduled work for the mechanical engineering department and served in Site Business Services as well Project Management. Mr. Smith received the 1995 Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) Technology Transfer Award in recognition of leadership in applying EPRI developed technology. In 1996, Mr. Smith left Entergy to establish a successful consulting business which later merged with I.C. Thomasson Associates, Inc., where he served as a principal mechanical engineer and President of MS Operations. Mr. Smith has served as a project manager and design engineer on numerous commercial and industrial projects including a power generation station at Mississippi State University which received the 2006 Grand Award presented by the American Council of Engineering Companies of Mississippi.

John Rivera, CEO of USSEC, stated, "We are obviously very pleased with Mr. Smith's decision to join our team. We have worked very closely with Mr. Smith for several months now in association with our continuing relationship with IC Thomasson. He has considerable specialized prime engineering experience covering a wide range of projects. Mr. Smith knows our technology and process intimately, and hence we view his joining our team as validation and confirmation of our vision and mission statement. Mr. Smith will play a valuable role in our subsidiary company, Sustainable Power Corp. which, as previously announced, will be spun off on a one-for-one basis to shareholders of record as of December 1st, 2006."

http://www.marketwire.com/mw/release_html_b1?release_id=187602

I think you have accurately described the risks involved in
speculating/investing in a start-up company with a new technology.

When the answers you are seeking are widely available and
proven, the price will reflect those developments. You seem to
want a sure thing and it isn't there yet. I really don't think there is
a sure thing. You just have to take what is
available at any given time and make a judgement.

That was just the private corporation. Needs to be dissolved
before the public one.

I tend to think that the diesel engine stuff is a relevant
subject, but I would also tend to think at this phase of the
operation data on turbine engines would be much more relevant.
By the company's own admission, fuel for motor vehicles are on
down the line. With Mr. Smith's involvement and his history in the
power generating business they obviously have data in
the area they are pursuing currently. Otherwise it wouldn't have
been a very smart career move to quit a great job to start working with
an unproven technology. I think he is fairly comfortable with his choice.
Business plan is power generation now, other usages next.

Recent event concerning Sustainable Power Corp.

Getting ready for something.


http://www.sos.state.ms.us/imaging/29775734.pdf
https://secure.sos.state.ms.us/Busserv/corp/soskb/Filings.asp?433800

Give us a scenario and all the steps that need to be taken to
prove a generator is running on biofuel made in the biofuel
reactor. I think there have been many people observe the whole
process and we are still where we are today questioning.

Didn't they run a generator at the demo. How many believed it
was a 50/50 mix of biofuel and biodiesel.

I doubt Mr. Rivera would publish hard data on his website if it wasn't true--otherwise the SEC might have words with him and the word,

By your reasoning he is in trouble now because he is stating
biofuel is a 100% replacement for diesel.

"No engine retrofits needed
USSEC biofuel can be used at 100 percent in diesel engines and with a 50/50 blend for gasoline engines without retrofits or modifications. Its lower viscosity eliminates the formation of gum residues on engine parts that has been a problem with traditional biodiesel fuels, requiring them to be blended with petroleum fuels."
http://www.ussec.us/technology.html

Before Kelmer R. Smith worked for us.............


NATCHEZ, MS -- (MARKET WIRE) -- 10/16/2006 -- U.S. Sustainable Energy Corp., a Mississippi Corporation ("US Sustainable," "USSEC" or "the Company") (PINKSHEETS: LFZA), announced today an agreement with I.C. Thomasson Associates, Inc. ( www.icthomasson.com ) to build an organic fertilizer and biofuel production facility in Natchez, MS, and a 40 MW Green power generation facility in Vidalia, LA.

Kelmer R. Smith, Jr. PE, CEM, CPP, President of I.C. Thomasson MS Operations, stated, "For the last several months, I have had the privilege of assisting USSEC in preparing a Basis of Design Document for their Natchez, MS, production plant as well as a feasibility study for their Vidalia, LA, power generation station. I have personally witnessed the production of the USSEC biofuels and have seen one formulation demonstrated as a 50/50 fuel in a variety of unmodified diesel engines and a second 100% formulation demonstrated in several gasoline engines. In my opinion, USSEC will produce the next generation biofuels with significant, positive socio-economic impacts. I.C. Thomasson Associates, Inc. is elated to be chosen as the design professional to assist USSEC in implementing this ground-breaking technology."

http://www.marketwire.com/mw/release_html_b1?release_id=172845

Some background on Kelmer Smith, President of Sustainable Power Corp. ...............


ACEC of MS Engineering Excellence Awards - February 2006
ICT was presented with the Grand Award by the American Council of Engineering Companies of Mississippi for the design of the Mississippi State University Power Generation Plant. ICT was the prime professional on the project, and the engineers of record from our Brookhaven office are Kelmer Smith and Chuck Farnham. Congratulations!

I've discussed this with a few people and it would be nearly

impossible to "prove" the generators were actually running

biofuel, wouldn't it? Most skeptics would say it was running

something else unless you could prove all fuel going in was

biofuel.

Good discussion from the recent past...........

By: Fairwayiron
22 Jan 2007, 01:08 PM EST
Msg. 4030 of 4461
(This msg. is a reply to 4029 by midas11.)
Jump to msg. #
Two PR's will do that. I just wish one would announce operations and sales. Looking for customers, project areas and locations shouldn't be necessary. One tube running with one generator running and all the numbers in a row should have a line out the door and around the world.

By: robbost
22 Jan 2007, 04:09 PM EST
Msg. 4038 of 4461
(This msg. is a reply to 4030 by Fairwayiron.)
Jump to msg. #
yes, and I agree that with increasing exposure the number of customers will exceed availability of product. So the trick is to pick out of that big line the choice customers who will agree to the best deal (price, length of contract, supply, financial stability, credibility, etc.) Not necessarily pick the first customers to knock on the door, but the best customers. I think that is what USSE is doing by stirring up potential customers and waiting to make the decision on final contracts.

By: Fairwayiron
22 Jan 2007, 04:17 PM EST
Msg. 4040 of 4461
(This msg. is a reply to 4038 by robbost.)
Jump to msg. #
Exactly, and that's the reason for my post. Actually, the number of customers far exceeds the availability of product today.

The reduced cost of producing ethanol could probably upset a lot of companies now.....

By: Fairwayiron
22 Jan 2007, 03:32 PM EST
Msg. 4036 of 4461
(This msg. is a reply to 4035 by PaperProphet.)
Jump to msg. #
First, the $12 billion PR was by ONYI along with the percentage calculation error. However, the math wizards seem to be endemic in the Stanton stock world. USEI used to get the savings percentage of using their dual fuel backwards every week in their weekly fuel reports. They solved the issue by skipping the last seven reports or so.

Just so everyone is on the same page, ONYI claims their tech increases ethanol yield by 30% and drying gas represents 35% of the cost which will be eliminated via merger with USSE. Instead of saving a total of 65%, the savings are 50%. Without using a formula, look at it this way. One gallon of ethanol costs $1.00 to make. The process increases the one gallon to 1.3 gallons and JR makes it for .65. How much does one gallon cost? Hint: $.50.

Those figures are for example only. I have no interest in how much it costs to make ethanol.
- - - - -

Posted by: goosemeister
In reply to: caneman who wrote msg# 14770 Date: 12/14/2006 3:13:25 PM
Post #

from the website of the us patent office:

2. Is there any danger that the USPTO will give others information contained in my application while it is pending?

A. Most patent applications filed on or after November 29, 2000, will be published 18 months after the filing date of the application, or any earlier filing date relied upon under Title 35, United States Code. Otherwise, all patent applications are maintained in the strictest confidence until the patent is issued or the application is published. After the application has been published, however, a member of the public may request a copy of the application file. After the patent is issued, the Office file containing the application and all correspondence leading up to issuance of the patent is made available in the Files Information Unit for inspection by anyone, and copies of these files may be purchased from the Office.

http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/pac/doc/general/faq.htm

Looks like they got the exposure that was bound to happen.
What will determine the outcome of this is how the company
responds.

My take on the forbes article........

Might be wrong but this should be taken as a golden opportunity, possibly the biggest and most important chance to prove the validity of this technology the company will ever have. They have been asking for a spotlight and they have gotten a big one. They have already convinced many very smart and distinguished people by showing them the technology. Now all they need to do is demonstrate the process to Forbes. Convincing the skeptics on a stock bulletin board will achieve very little, but convincing Forbes will achieve everything. Forbes is one of the most respectable, if not THE most respectable investment magazine, out there. Hopefully the company will challenge them in the media spotlight and prove themselves. They have the chance to change their future and need to rise to the challenge. They have never been shy about wanting national coverage and now they have their chance. Will be disappointed if they do not take full advantage of this situation. Kinda hope they were prepared and expected something like this.

(this Forbes thing was "leaked" on the board just recently so
most likely the company has known it was coming.)

Posted by: mr optimism
In reply to: geeps20 who wrote msg# 24094 Date:1/29/2007 12:43:56 PM
Post #of 24547

JR knows what he has, and even better, knows what the potential is. I totally agree that it's not prudent to give timelines for significant developments and then not meet those timelines. However, as a long term investor, I tend to overlook these mistakes and shrug them off to JR's excessive enthusiasm along with his sincere desire for all of us shareholders to get "wealthy off his discovery". That being said, I firmly believe that the ONYI definitive agreement is imminent, based upon stock price action of the past two weeks along with confirmation that ONYI's top management absolutely wants this merger completed as quickly as possible.
As a bonus, I understand that some exposure for USSE will appear in a major U.S. financial publication within the next couple of weeks. Presumably it's positive rhetoric, and if so, I expect that at the very least, we broaden our shareholder base as a result of this exposure.
LM


Posted by: whassup
In reply to: mr optimism who wrote msg# 24104 Date: 1/29/2007 12:57:35 PM
Post #

wsj?



Posted by: mr optimism
In reply to: whassup who wrote msg# 24112 Date: 1/29/2007 1:42:08 PM
Post #

Forbes.

No... just reporting what is out there and will be discussed
here.

Forbes article...........................

http://www.forbes.com/free_forbes/2007/0226/078.html?partner=yahoomag

why all the posts on alternative energy all of the sudden, david? each day there are numerous new articles about alternative energy.

LOL. Guess lack of company news inspires "industry" news.

go Buckeyes

Very interesting article. We may be "ahead" of the curve.................

Nexant Forecasts Transition from First-Generation Biofuels

Current and emerging liquid biofuels technologies.
A newly published study by energy consultant Nexant, Inc. concludes that the current generation of commercialized biofuels—biodiesel and bioethanol produced from grains and sugars—are likely transitional technologies.

The study—Liquid Biofuels: Substituting for Petroleum—concludes that fatty acid methyl ester biodiesel will be capable of substituting for only a small fraction of global diesel demand. However, as a biodegradable, low-toxicity product, it will likely hold market share far into the future.

Bioethanol from grains and sugar, though an excellent high-octane gasoline blendstock, has many practical problems and is also likely to be transitional over the long term, according to the study.

Nexant projects that the next phase of development is likely to be ethanol made by fermentation of sugars obtained through biomass hydrolysis. Nexant also concludes that, perhaps sooner than some may believe, integrated thermochemical platforms will take the lead in producing both gasoline and diesel range biofuels (biomass-to-liquids [BTL], similar to coal-to-liquids and gas-to-liquids), most likely in conjunction with electric power and chemicals. This alternative should be—and probably will be—pursued contemporaneously with developing biomass-based ethanol, according to Nexant.

Regardless of which substrate is used to produce it, ethanol will eventually need to be dehydrated to hydrocarbon gasoline fractions that are more compatible with the existing fuel distribution and vehicle infrastructure.

In adopting ethanol dehydration, higher alcohols, and biofuels from syngas, society will make tradeoffs between two options: (1) the current renewable, sustainable biofuels that are biodegradable and have low toxicity, but have limited supply potential, and (2) other biofuels that are equally renewable and have small carbon footprints but are less biodegradable or more noxious—yet are more attractive in other ways.

While crop biotechnology may provide a more productive, varied, and stable feedstock platform for a biofuels industry, the potential for early conflict with food is probably underestimated, according to Nexant.

The role of byproducts such as DDGS, and possibly biodiesel glycerine, in balancing animal nutrition supplies is conversely underrated or even missed by many analysts. Nonetheless, the market’s mere perception of competition of biofuels for sugar and grains with the food, feed, and fibers sectors seems to be enough to cause dislocations. This is already evident in the markedly higher late 2006 prices for US corn, Brazilian sugarcane, and European rapeseed—each the primary biofuel feedstock in its venue.

The study outlines a number of attractive “paths of least resistance” for developing the global biofuels industry based on leveraging current or co-developing technologies, such as coal gasification and gas-to-liquids catalysis. For the interim strategy of fermenting sugars from biomass, a number of preparation options are available, and thermal utilization of fermentation process residues needs to be carefully considered.

For the thermochemical platform of the future, more work must be done to develop in-field pyrolysis of biomass to help overcome logistics challenges, as well as biomass gasification and system optimization.

The study profiles a broad range of agricultural and biotechnology platforms and issues, and its geographic coverage includes the countries playing significant roles in biofuel feeds, production, and/or technology development over the next decade, including:

The Americas—primarily, the US, Brazil, and Canada, and also other countries in the hemisphere with activities in liquid biofuels.

Europe—Western, Central, and Eastern, and Russia.

Asia—primarily, China, Japan, India, Thailand, and Malaysia, and also other countries in Asia with activities in liquid biofuels.

Africa (primarily South Africa) and Australia.

Resources:

Prospectus for Liquid Biofuels: Substituting for Petroleum

http://www.greencarcongress.com/2006/12/nexant_forecast.html#more

An ethanol plant being bought by an electric utility company.

Posted by: eelfland
In reply to: billaro3 who wrote msg# 26143 Date:2/7/2007 2:41:59 PM
Post #of 26155

USSE "fuel" won't power a diesel engine.

A diesel engine may run with USSE juice mixed with the fuel, but not even the company says you can run a diesel engine on it, although they say it's a "replacement" for fuel. So's water.

e

Openly claimed on USSEC website..........................



No engine retrofits needed
USSEC biofuel can be used at 100 percent in diesel engines and with a 50/50 blend for gasoline engines without retrofits or modifications. Its lower viscosity eliminates the formation of gum residues on engine parts that has been a problem with traditional biodiesel fuels, requiring them to be blended with petroleum fuels.

http://www.ussec.us/technology.html

Regina ethanol firm bought

Bruce Johnstone
The Leader-Post
Wednesday, February 07, 2007

Terra Grain Fuels, the privately owned, Regina-based company that's building a $140-million ethanol plant at Belle Plaine, has been acquired by Universal Energy Group, which sells natural gas and electricity to customers in Ontario and Michigan.

Last week, Universal Energy Group Ltd. launched an initial public offering (IPO) of 11.4 million shares at $11 per share to raise $125 million, the company said in a news release.

The Toronto Stock Exchange has conditionally approved the listing of Universal's shares under the symbol UEG.

Coincident with the IPO, Universal Energy Group will acquire all of the shares of Universal Energy Corporation and Terra Grain Fuels Holdings Inc.

Universal Energy sells electricity and natural gas to residential, small- to mid-size commercial and small-industrial customers in Ontario and sells natural gas to small- to mid-size commercial and small-industrial customers in Michigan.

Terra Grain Fuels is constructing an ethanol facility designed to produce 150 million litres of ethanol annually. The facility is scheduled to be in production in late December.

Tim LaFrance, president of Terra Grain Fuels, said the deal combines Universal Energy's cash flow with Terra Grain's assets, namely the largest wheat-based ethanol plant in North America.

"There's really two businesses that are being merged together,' LaFrance said. "The acquisition company is Universal Energy Group and it's buying Universal Energy Corp., which is an energy retailing business.'

Simultaneously, Universal Energy Group is going public and acquiring Terra Grain Fuels. LaFrance said Terra Grains provides an asset for the new public company's balance sheet, while Universal Energy Corp. is providing the "stability of cash flow.'

Universal Energy Corp. reported about $43 million in "operating margin,' or operating profit, for the fiscal year ended Sept. 30.

LaFrance said the share issue will provide the equity capital to build a second ethanol plant.

"We now have intact the ability for us to build another ethanol plant.'

It also will allow for individual investor participation in the ethanol business, he added.

The merger also involves two long-time business partners.

Terra Grain Fuels chairman and founder Gary Drummond and Universal Energy president Mark Silver were partners in Trans-Prairie Energy Management in the early 1990s, LaFrance said.

That company bought DirectEnergy, a direct sales natural gas company operating mainly in Alberta and Ontario. DirectEnergy was acquired by Centrica, formed from a "demerged' former U.K. Crown corporation, British Gas, for $912 million in 2000.

Drummond and Silver stayed on with DirectEnergy for about a year, while LaFrance, who joined DirectEnergy in 1998, stayed on for another three years. Drummond and Silver got out of the energy retailing business for three years, then established Universal Energy in January 2005.

© The Leader-Post (Regina) 2007

http://www.canada.com/reginaleaderpost/news/business_agriculture/story.html?id=10906be0-8354-47b0-92...

GM: Ethanol Must be More Available for Flex-Fuel Use (SiouxCityJournal)
8:15 AM

DES MOINES, Iowa (AP) -- An auto industry executive says the ethanol industry must work to make higher blends of the fuel more available as an increasing number of car buyers begin driving flex-fuel vehicles.

Mary Beth Stanek, GM's director for Environment and Energy, said the company remains committed to flex-fuel technology, but also is working on the development of electric hybrid and hydrogen fuel cell technology.

Since only so much funding is available for research and development "we need to see a corresponding of support from the (ethanol) industry" to make sure that the fuels are available to drivers and that the flex-fuel vehicles "are experiencing the fuel," said Stanek, who manages GM's partnerships with ethanol producers.

"We're not going to work on power trains when we don't have fuel for it, and we're certainly going to make sure that it's economical for consumers as well," she told dozens of renewable fuels industry leaders and media who attended a biofuels forum put on by Successful Farming magazine on Tuesday.

Making available E85 -- an 85 percent ethanol, 15 percent gasoline blend -- shouldn't be "as hard as people are making it," Stanek said.

"I'm not saying it's easy, but ... we can all work together to get more E85 out there," she said. "I just don't feel it's insurmountable."

While the ethanol industry frequently announces the opening of new E85 pumps, the blend really is "a classic chicken and the egg" scenario, said Matt Hartwig, a spokesman for the Renewable Fuels Association, a national trade group.

To make it mainstream, he said there need to be vehicles that can burn it, the infrastructure to make it and transport it, and the need for more technology to produce enough ethanol to supply the higher E85 demands. That includes more development in cellulosic ethanol production, which breaks down organic material from various plants, not just corn, to make ethanol.

GM, Ford and DaimlerChrysler have said they aim to have half of annual vehicle production be E85 flexible fuel or biodiesel capable by 2012. For Detroit-based GM, the world's largest auto maker, that means stepping up production from 400,000 of the flex-fuel vehicles each year to 800,000.

The price of the parts that help vehicles use E85 can range from $150 to $500. But for the auto manufacturers, Stanek said the investment into the technology to make the vehicles run correctly on the fuel is "quite expensive."

"It's not the parts in the box, it's about the investment into the engineering expense," she said. "We are willing to do that, and we're going as fast as we can."

While the ethanol industry has major praise for the three auto makers who have committed to increasing flex-fuel vehicle production, Hartwig indicted they're probably not missing out on profit by doing so. He said that's especially because foreign auto makers such as Toyota and Honda aren't offering the vehicles in the United States.

"GM and Ford and Chrysler saw and opportunity and a market and they jumped in there. Obviously there's a reason that they're in there," he said, adding that the vehicles will run on both flex-fuels and regular gasoline, so they don't limit consumers' ability to fuel up even if they can't find an E85 pump.

In the end, Hartwig said it's going to require cooperation between all sectors, including government, private auto makers and the ethanol industry, to help expand the use of E85, which has gotten resistance from oil companies who don't always want to see the renewable fuel compete under their canopies.

"It is coming," he said. "You're seeing more and people offering it at their stations, and you're seeing a greater effort to push public awareness."

On the Net:

General Motors Corp: http://www.gm.com

Renewable Fuels Association: http://www.ethanolrfa.org

AP-CS-02-07-07 0102EST

http://www.siouxcityjournal.com/articles/2007/02/07/news/latest_news/1ef9c9736de899518625727b004e378...

Cellulosic ethanol plant slated for Treutlen
Atlanta Business Chronicle - 9:45 AM EST Wednesday Feb 07, 2007
Range Fuels Inc. will build Georgia's first wood-based cellulosic ethanol plant in Treutlen County, Gov. Sonny Perdue announced Wednesday at the Georgia Agribusiness Council's annual State Legislative Breakfast.

Colorado-based cellulosic ethanol company Range Fuels believes its plant, plus others to follow, will be able to produce more than 1 billion gallons of ethanol a year. The company's first plant will create 69 jobs in the Treutlen area.

Wood waste from the state's millions of acres of indigenous Georgia pine trees will be the main source of biomass for the ethanol production. While most domestic ethanol production requires corn as a feedstock, Range Fuels' proprietary technology transforms otherwise useless products such as agricultural wastes, grasses, cornstalks and wood waste, as well as hog manure, municipal garbage, sawdust and paper pulp, into ethanol through a thermal conversion process. This technology will be proven on a commercial scale in Georgia, Perdue said.

"Today's announcement is not only great news for Range Fuels and Treutlen County, but also our state's forestry industry and Georgia's continued push to encourage bio-fuels developed from home-grown products," Perdue said. "Georgia will be a national leader in cellulosic ethanol, and Range Fuel's investments here will be a major step forward helping us address our state's long-term energy issues."

http://charlotte.bizjournals.com/atlanta/stories/2007/02/05/daily21.html

Agriculture Advocates Bolster Blunt's Bio-Fuel Initiative
Wednesday, February 7, 2007, 10:43 AM
By Laura McNamara

Missouri's push in bio-fuel production is a testament to the state's role as a leader in the agriculture industry for Governor Blunt. He says Missouri is the fourth state to forge ahead in the bio-fuel frontier with its 10% ethanol blend requirement beginning in 2008. He says he's confident that Missouri can produce the 300 million gallons of ethanol needed to meet that standard as well as an excess for exporting.

Blunt says he expects the market to sufficiently regulate whether enough state-produced ethanol remains in the state to meet the 10% ethanol standard. He adds the state will be working with providers to ensure that ethanol is distributed properly.

Livestock owners are worried about the ethanol standard's impact on the prices of corn-based feed, which impacts their profit. Though corn prices have nearly doubled, Blunt says a healthy price is good for both farmers and the economy. Fred Ferrell, Director of the state Agriculture Department says the high prices will simply encourage corn growers to produce more crop, which will in turn drive prices back down. Senator Dan Clemens adds that once bio-fuel production takes off, livestock owners will have an abundance of a by-product to use as an alternative feed, dry distiller grains, or soy-bean meal.

Blunt says his bio-diesel and ethanol initiative improves air quality, creates jobs, generates additional revenue and revitalizes the rural agriculture community. Both he and Senator Clemens say state bio-fuel production would lessen the U.S. reliance on European oil and could potentially lead to a North American Independence with fuel. The state currently has 7 bio-fuel plants in Missouri and Blunt says more are being developed.

http://www.missourinet.com/gestalt/go.cfm?objectid=9D195E34-AF49-79AC-EE2393E2C7B102A0

President calls for less oil dependence
President George W. Bush put ethanol and biodiesel on the center stage again at his 2007 State of the Union Address. Now the ethanol and biodiesel industries are looking for the correct path leading to an aggressive goal.
By Dave Nilles


While the speech may not be remembered for a reference to switchgrass or an “America is addicted to oil” quotation, President George W. Bush’s 2007 State of the Union Address once again gave ethanol and biodiesel the center stage in a national venue.

Bush set a goal of producing 35 billion gallons of alternative fuels by 2017 as part of a plan to reduce U.S. gasoline consumption by 20 percent in the next 10 years. The alternative fuels standard (AFS) would include more fuels than the current renewable fuels standard (RFS), which Bush signed into law as part of the Energy Policy Act of 2005. The RFS calls for 7.5 billion gallons of renewable fuel use by 2012.

The President’s plan, titled Twenty in Ten: Strengthening America’s Energy Security, also calls for reforming the Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFÉ) standards, stepping up domestic crude oil production and doubling the capacity of the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. “Let us build on the work we’ve done and reduce gasoline usage in the United States by 20 percent in the next 10 years,” Bush said. “When we do that we will have cut our total imports by the equivalent of three-quarters of all the oil we now import from the Middle East.”

Currently, the U.S. ethanol industry has capacity to produce nearly 5.6 billion gallons of ethanol annually. An additional 4.1 billion gallons is under construction and expected on line within the next 18 months. “Our industry is up to the challenge,” said Renewable Fuels Association (RFA) Chairman Ron Miller.



The biodiesel industry has the capacity to produce more than 700 million gallons of fuel. The National Biodiesel Board (NBB) estimates approximately 250 million gallons of biodiesel were produced in 2006. “We are glad to see that the President’s Twenty in Ten plan includes strong steps toward renewable energy, energy conservation and diversification, and carbon reduction,” said NBB CEO Joe Jobe.

Additional details of the President’s energy plans were listed in a pre-speech briefing released by the White House Office of Communications. The President’s proposal calls for 35 billion gallons of renewable and alternative fuels in 2017, and increasing the scope of the standard from an RFS to an alternative fuel standard, including corn-based ethanol, cellulosic ethanol, biodiesel, methanol, butanol, hydrogen and alternative fuels.

Bush began discussing energy about 15 minutes into his speech. “It's in our vital interest to diversify America's energy supply—the way forward is through technology,” Bush said. “We must continue changing the way America generates electric power, by even greater use of clean coal technology, solar and wind energy, and clean, safe nuclear power. We need to press on with battery research for plug-in and hybrid vehicles, and the use of clean diesel vehicles and biodiesel fuel. We must continue investing in new methods of producing ethanol, using everything from wood chips to grasses to agricultural wastes.”

The increased standard will also contain multiple “safety valves,” such as giving the EPA administrator and the Secretaries of Agriculture and Energy the authority to waive or modify the standard if deemed necessary. The standard will also include an automatic “safety valve” to protect against unforeseen increases in the prices of alternative fuels or their feedstocks.

Both corn and soybeans, the predominant feedstocks for the ethanol and biodiesel industries, have recently increased in prices. Cellulosic ethanol will likely have to play a significant role to meet Bush’s proposed AFS. “Between now and 2017, you’ll have cellulosic ethanol commercialized,” said RFA President Bob Dinneen.

The President expects most of the expanded fuel standard to be met with domestically produced alternative fuels, according to the pre-speech release. However, importing alternative fuels will also be part of the plan.

Under the plan, Congress would not legislate a particular numeric fuel economy standard. The Secretary of Transportation would be given the authority to set the fuel standard based on cost/benefit analysis.

The plan would also allow auto companies to buy and sell CAFÉ credits. By 2017, the renewable fuel and fuel efficiency components of the plan would cut annual emissions from cars and light trucks by as much as 10 percent, or about 175 million metric tons.

Funding for the plan was also discussed in the pre-speech briefing. The President’s 2008 budget contains funding for advanced energy technologies, including nearly $2.7 billion for the Advanced Energy Initiative, which Bush announced in his 2006 State of the Union Address. The initiative focuses on increasing research and development on energy technology.

The budget also provides $179 million for the Biofuels Initiative, which is aimed at accelerating cost reduction and commercial development of cellulosic ethanol.

Bush’s Farm Bill proposal will include more than $1.6 billion of additional new funding over 10 years for energy innovation including bioenergy research, energy efficiency grants and $2 billion in loans for cellulosic ethanol plants.

It’s unclear how a 35 billion gallons AFS would be implemented. The EPA has yet to release its final implementation plan for the current RFS. The EPA is expected to unveil its final ruling within the next few months. The RFA hasn’t endorsed an increase in the RFS until after the EPA’s ruling is issued. “Our industry applauds President Bush for his recognition of ethanol’s importance and looks forward to working with him on an agenda that takes this industry to a bold new horizon,” Dinneen said.

Dave Nilles is Online Editor for Ethanol Producer Magazine. Reach him at dnilles@bbibiofuels.com or (701) 373-0636.

Posted: 3:15 p.m. CST Tuesday, January 23, 2007

http://www.ethanolproducer.com/article.jsp?article_id=2664

Posted by: Beanpower
In reply to: davidmarkblack who wrote msg# 26099 Date:2/7/2007 12:37:17 PM
Post #of 26114

Dave , would you or could you post the specific's of the Pres Biofuel Initiative? Would be helpful DD

This should get you started.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/stateoftheunion/2007/initiatives/energy.html

Tennessee: UT Researchers Outline Nation's Energy Supplies from Renewable Sources
Feb 02, 2007 - Burton C. English, Department of Agricultural Economics, University of Tennessee - Press Release


A new economic analysis conducted by researchers at the University of
Tennessee outlines how America's vast natural resources can be tapped to
produce 25 percent of the nation's energy supply from renewable sources by
2025. With continued advancements in technology and significant shifts in
cropping patterns, U.S. farmers, ranchers and foresters can all contribute to this energy goal while still providing abundant supplies of food, feed and fiber. The research team led by Professor Burton C. English and Associate Professor and Assistant Director to the Agricultural Policy analysis Center (APAC) Daniel De La Torre Ugarte included Kim Jensen, Christopher Clark, Roland Roberts, Marie Walsh, Jamey Menard, Chad Hellwinckel, and Brad Wilson examined the possibility of America's Agricultural Sector meeting future energy demands of 15.45 Quads of energy. They found that the United States could supply 87 billion gallons of ethanol, 1.1 billion gallons of biodiesel, along with 932 billion kWh of electricity frombiomass. "The demand for energy is large and the resulting industrial complex that would emerge is capable of adding $700 billion to the nation's economy. It is a win for agriculture, a win for government, a win for national security, and a win for rural development" says Dr. English "This cutting-edge research provides the first comprehensive look at how both crop and livestock production might respond to increased demands for renewable energy," says J. Read Smith, co-chair of the 25x'25 Project Steering Committee. "Not only would reaching the goal drastically reduce our dependence on foreign energy sources, it would also have an extremely favorable impact on rural America and the nation as a whole. This report says we could see more than $700 billion in economic activity and 5.1 million new jobs." The 25x'25 Project Steering Committee established the "25x'25" vision and, along with the Energy Future Coalition and the Energy Foundation, financed the study. The UT analysis addresses two scenarios: The impacts of producing 25 percent of the nation's electric power and motor vehicle fuels from renewable resources, utilizing findings from a new RAND report, and a second scenario which outlines how agriculture and forestry resources could produce 25 percent of the nation's total energy demands. While a variety of renewable energy resources, including wind, hydro, solar, and geothermal, would be needed to meet the goal, the study principally examines the impact of producing the amount of biomass needed from agriculture and forestry. Both scenarios show the need for continued yield increases in major crops, strong contributions from the forestry sector, utilization of food processing wastes, and the use of 50-100 million acres for dedicated energy crops, like switchgrass. The study assumes that the technology needed to produce cellulosic ethanol will be available and competitive by 2012. "Using all of these sources will allow us to meet the 25x'25 renewable energy goal and will add $180 billion to net farm income," says Smith. "In 2025 alone, net farm income would increase by $37 billion compared with USDA baseline projections."

http://biobased.org/list2.php?storyid=10704

$10m Grant to Aid Biofuel Development at Cornell University


To help advance technologies that convert perennial grasses and woody biomass to ethanol, Cornell professor of biological and environmental engineering Larry Walker will use a $10 million grant from the Empire State Development Corp. to upgrade Cornell's industrial biotechnology laboratories. He also will serve an official adviser to a new biomass-to-ethanol demonstration facility in Rochester, N.Y.

The grant will be used to renovate laboratories in Riley Robb Hall and to purchase fermenters, incubators and state-of-the-art analytical equipment. It also will improve researchers' abilities to overcome the physical, chemical and biological barriers to liberating sugars from such energy crops as switchgrass, miscanthus and other perennial grasses as well as woody biomass, and to biologically convert these sugars into such biofuels as ethanol, butanol or hydrogen.

"Although corn-based ethanol production is the current state-of-the-art technology, the future development, success and sustainability of the U.S. ethanol industry hinges on developing and converting perennial grasses and woody biomass, cellulosic biomass, to ethanol," he says. Walker is also director of the 14-state Northeast Sun Grant Institute of Excellence, which researches the use of plant biomass in energy and chemical production.

"Cellulosic ethanol production could be economically advantageous for New York state because we know how to grow grasses and woody biomass, and we know how to implement biotechnology. These activities are core to the industrial biotechnology component to the evolving New York biofuels sector," Walker says.

In a related initiative, Walker is collaborating with Mascoma Corp. and Genencor to develop a $14 million cellulosic ethanol pilot-plant in Rochester funded by New York State Department of Agriculture and Markets and the New York State Energy Research and Development Authority. The plant will convert such products as paper sludge, wood chips, switchgrass and corn stover (the leaves and stalks that are left in a field after harvest) to ethanol.

"Cornell shares Mascoma's objectives to demonstrate and refine the cellulose-to-ethanol process and in determining the most appropriate feedstock strategies to support viable and sustainable commercial scale energy crop initiatives," says Walker. "By collaborating with Mascoma, Cornell and its master of engineering students will gain key insights into both the requirements and operation of a demonstration-scale biofuels plant."

Working with Mascoma, Walker adds, also will allow Cornell researchers to apply its research to so-called energy crops grown in New York as well as to have access to vital operating data to use to refine modeling techniques that are important for the growth of agricultural-based bio-industries. The plant also will work with International Paper, Clarkson University and the National Resources Defense Council.

Posted February 5th, 2007

http://www.azom.com/details.asp?newsID=7705