Leasing a Green Vehicle Gets You a Rebate in Colorado

A bill signed in Colorado will now allow lessees to claim any tax credits for hybrid cars and electric vehicles, rather than the lessor.

Previously, the state had allowed banks or finance companies to choose whether claim the credits themselves on lease vehicles, or to pass the credits on to the lessee.

Predictably, this resulted in plenty of finance companies hanging onto the credit themselves, preventing customers from realising the benefits.

TimesCall reports that the state's income tax credit for buying what it describes as "innovative motor vehicles" will now benefit lease consumers equally.

"This legislation will benefit consumers across the state who have chosen to be both fiscally and environmentally responsible", explained Senate President Brandon Shaffer. "I look forward to knowing this credit is going back into the pockets of Colorado families."

Like many tax-based credit systems, the state's formula for calculating credits is apparently complex, but Rep. Jonathan Singer, whose bill now guarantees the credits, says the credit usually runs to around $2,500.

If you've been holding out for an electric vehicle, hybrid or alt-fuel vehicle, there's never been a better time to lease in Colorado.


Source: Green Car Reports

Propane Autogas: The Sleeping Giant of Alternative Fuel

With reports coming out that gas prices could hit $5.00 a gallon soon, the magnifying glass has been put on alternative fuels like never before. One low profile alternative fuel being considered is propane autogas.

Everyone knows about natural gas as an alternative fuel and the controversy that surround it. However, most in America have not heard of propane auto gas. Propane is a byproduct of natural gas and petroleum, occurring naturally during domestic oil refining and natural gas processing. It is 270 times more compact as a liquid than as a gas, making propane highly economical to store and transport. Propane is also known as liquefied petroleum gas (LPG or LP gas) and when propane used as an on-road engine fuel, it is called propane autogas.

Worldwide there are more than 15 million vehicles in using propane autogas making it the third most common engine fuel behind gasoline and diesel fuel. In the U.S. propane autogas fuels about 270,000 vehicles with 2,500 autogas fueling stations found across the United States.

Propane autogas is domestically produced, has historically cost 30 – 40 percent less than gasoline per gallon, and does not rob a car of its performance like other alternative fuels. With an octane level of 105, autogas will not take the power out of your alternative fueled vehicle. Additionally, autogas burns cleaner than gasoline which means less maintenance and less maintenance cost for your vehicle – plus propane autogas weighs approximately 1.86 pounds less per gallon than gasoline.

Why have we in America not heard of this before? Well, for one thing the American propane industry has been in decline for some time now. Also, there is no one central big American propane company. The American propane industry is comprised of many small companies spread out across the U.S. This means that the American propane industry does not have much lobbying power on Capitol Hill and no big named spokes person, like T. Boone Pickens does for natural gas.

Tucker Perkins, chief operating officer and president of the trade group CleanFUEL USA, understands the problem but points out that things are getting better for autogas saying,

“It used to be that almost no one we would talk to had any knowledge about autogas, even though here we are as the number 3 fuel in the world. I would definitely say its better, but by no means have we reached the point where we can say the job is done. We’re not even close to that.”

Stuart Weidie is the leader of the industry group Autogas for America and it is because of Weidie and the efforts of Autogas for America that autogas is gaining some attention in America. Weidie and his group introduced the “Propane Green Autogas Solutions (GAS) Act” to Capitol Hill in 2011. The Propane GAS Act has since been introduced in both the House of Representatives and Senate and currently is pending in the Ways and Means and Finance committees — A.K.A. where issues go to die.

Overall, the current state of autogas support in America is not that strong. However, as more American’s head back to work, tensions continue to rise in the Middle East, and gas prices creeping up varied types of alternative fueled vehicles are stepping into the limelight. In fact, Pittsburgh’s Yellow Cab recently announced their plan to convert 75 of their fleet vehicles to run on autogas. There is interest in alternative fuels and America should not count the propane industry and autogas out just yet.

Source: Gas2.0

The Republican Candidates On Alternative Energy and Electric Vehicles

We know where our Democratic President stands of Electric Vehicles (EVs) and alternative energy thanks to President Obama’s State of the Union Address. But where do the remaining Republican challengers stand on such issues? We here at Gas2 decided to find out.

The current state of America is not great. The housing market has not returned, unemployment is high, and the price of good just keeps going up. To top things off 2012 also happens to be a Presidential election year – so that means not a lot of is actually going to get done on the real issues and instead all eyes are going to be on the race.

Currently there are four Republican candidates squaring off against one another for a chance to take on President Obama. The candidates are former Massachusetts Governor Willard Mitt Romney, former Republican Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich, Texas Senator Dr. Ron Paul, and former Republican Senator from Pennsylvania Rick Santorum.

Different people from different background and all with different ideas on many issues; but for the sake of our interests here at Gas2 let’s look at where each candidate stands on alternative fuel use and the growing EV market.

Willard Mitt Romney

On the issue of alternative fuels, Romney gives importance to achieving the targeted goal of American energy independence so that America can free itself from reliance on oil rich countries. At the same time, energy independence will aid America in becoming an economic and military superpower. Essentially through energy independence in Romney ‘s eyes America can do what it has to do without worrying about fuel or energy related consequences associated with the actions.

“The United States must become energy independent. This does not mean no longer importing or using oil. It means making sure that our nation’s future will always be in our hands. Our decisions and destiny cannot be bound to the whims of oil-producing states…” Romney said.

As for what kinds of alternative fuels Romney as listed as viable for the US, really for Romney just about everything is on the table. Nuclear energy, biodiesel, ethanol, and natural gas are all worth exploring for the Romney Camp. Additionally Romney has suggested exploiting domestic sources of oil such as the Outer Continental Shelf and Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. With the use of alternative fuels Romney believes the nation will also have to invest a lot into research and innovation. The areas that will need heavy investment include fuel technology, power generation and materials science with a focus on clean technology and more efficient power generation.

Mitt Romney is taking the safe road when it comes to his stance on alternative fuels. That safe road is saying that America’s dependency on foreign oil is bad and needs to stop, the solution for Romney is not set in stone, nuclear power or natural gas whatever works. What this does for Romney is not pigeonhole him within the alternative fuel markets. However, it is also not a clear plan.

This scatter shot approach to the alternative fuel issue is not uncommon for the Republican candidates as will soon be shown.

However, where Romney does stand out from the other candidates is on his stance that having America kick its foreign oil addiction will lead to an even stronger military. Romney has repeated time and time again his idea that having the strongest and largest military in the world will act as a deterrent from foreign aggression. This stated mixing of alternative energy and military muscle is a unique stance amongst the Republican candidates and one that Romney believes in.

On the issue of EVs, Romney has raised some eyebrows with comments that he has made. In an interview with The Detroit News, Tesla spokesperson Ricardo Reyes commented, “[It is] unfortunate that Gov. Romney is using Tesla as a political tool and he’s wrong. We’re creating American jobs.”

Reyes was commenting on a piece Romney wrote in which he said,

“Tesla’s next vehicle is expected to list for $57,400. Fisker’s car, already a year behind schedule, will cost $97,000. “We have a history of losses and we expect significant increases in our costs and expenses to result in continuing losses for at least the foreseeable future,” says Tesla’s most recent quarterly filing.

And neither firm has created many jobs. So far, approximately 100 workers are employed by Fisker in Wilmington, Del., while an additional 500 are actually assembling the cars in Finland. Tesla’s record is only slightly better. Even these few jobs may be illusory: studies of Europe’s green job experiments have found that each new green job destroys several other jobs elsewhere in the economy.”

This is an interesting departure from research approach that Romney has championed for regarding alternative fuel use and energy independence. On one hand Romney is saying that as a nation, America needs to explore all alternative energy options. But on the other hand, Romney is saying that the “European green job experiment” is no good for the United States.

The underlying factor for Romney is not that EVs are bad and that there is no market for them, as some other Republicans have said. For Romney it comes down to money. Romney is a capitalist and a successful one at that. For Romney companies live and die depending on the actions they take. On the American auto industry bailouts Romney said,

“It would have been best not to have had the president and government put their hands on the bankruptcy process … Bailouts are not the answer.”

The same goes for making EVs. Romney does not care that a company like Tesla is making an EV. From a capitalistic standpoint Romney is looking at Tesla and saying go for it, make the EVs and if they do not sell and Tesla goes away so be it – it’s the risk of doing business in the American market. What Romney does not like is the $1 billion USD in federal loans that companies like Tesla and Fisker took to create a few hundred “green jobs”.

Newt Gingrich

“Contrary to popular belief, America has more energy than any nation on earth. All that’s keeping us from becoming energy independent is a lack of political will to do so.” – Newt Gingrich

Gingrich has been in politics a long, time first arriving I Washington DC representing Georgia’s 6th congressional district in 1979. Gingrich is unique amid the other Republican candidates in regard to his alternative energy policies because Gingrich has actually written a book in which he details his plan. The book is titled A Contract with the Earth.

A Contract with the Earth details ways in which Gingrich would address almost every green issue facing America today. Within his book Gingrich comes out strongly in favor of nuclear energy and domestic oil drilling, he also recognizes the need for federal tax incentives that encourage clean energy choices, specifically singling out electric cars and renewable resources. Gingrich digs deep into federal agencies and policy and would replace the EPA with a more economically driven organization called the Environmental Solutions Agency. Gingrich has also written Drill Here, Drill Now, Pay Less: A Handbook for Slashing Gas Prices and Solving Our Energy Crisis.

At one of the latest CNN Republican Debates Gingrich said,

“We ought to have a massive all-sources energy program in the United States designed to, once again, create a surplus of energy here, so we could say to the Europeans pretty cheerfully, that all the various sources of oil we have in the United States, we could literally replace the Iranian oil.”

Gingrich’s approach to green issues combines solutions that the two major parties have put forward in the past. Interestingly, Gingrich’s emphasis on consumer choice, weak government control, and private enterprise reflect a gathering of Republican, Democrat, and even Libertarian proposals; and his “all options on the table” solution is the same solution taken by Romney.

Gingrich, however, is not all talk and thought on issues. Gingrich has put his proposals into action in the past most notably as was one of the sponsors of the Endangered Species Act. In fact, Gingrich record and reputation on the wide range of green issues is, arguably, clearer than any other candidate in the 2012 race — Democrat or Republican.

On the Gingrich website his energy plan is even laid out.

As for EVs, Gingrich has outlined their positive use in many of his environmentally and energy focused books. While Gingrich has shied away from mentioning the benefits of EVs as of late, his past published works in which he uses EVs as an example of viable clean energy solution speak for themselves.

Ron Paul

Ron Paul is a Libertarian through and through. As a Libertarian, Paul’s aim is to minimize federal government action in virtually every aspect, and that includes the energy and environmental fields.

Libertarian’s reason that the government has no business controlling or regulating what persons or firms do with their money, because of this system of thought Paul has been labeled by some as a non-green, however such labeling is inaccurate.

While Paul is “still open” on the question of global warming, Paul is not anti environment or alternative energy and fuel, not bay a long shot. Being a Libertarian Paul thinks that each state should pass their own environmental laws not the federal government – take the power away from the federal government and pass it off to each state plain and simple.

Paul supports nuclear, wind, solar, and any other forms of energy production. However, he opposes subsidies to them as he does not believe that the federal government has the right to take money from one person to subsidize the energy desires of another. Thus Paul is anti carbon tax as collected by the federal government. However, if a state put into effect their own carbon tax Paul would be fine with that because this would leave the business being hit with the carbon tax the option of moving to another state that did not have a carbon tax. Liberty.

In the past, Paul has noted that protection of the environment is not a function that the Constitution allows the federal government to perform. He has therefore called for an end to the EPA. To address any possible pollution, Paul has stated that private property rights should function in this aspect as no man has the right to pollute another person’s land, water, or air. He notes that if government regulation of the environment were removed and ill environment effects were addressed on a private property level, then the cost of any pollution would be built into the cost of that particular energy model. The best energy model would then prevail and would be the one that best balances the cost to bring the product to market and the effects it has on the environment.

Yes, it is a bit messy but on the issue of alternative energy Paul summed up his feeling through a post on his website:

“…I do not support providing federal grants to any industry, I do support the tax credits contained in the NAT Gas Act, HR 1380. These credits reduce taxes for the production or purchase of vehicles that run on American-made natural gas. These credits are not subsidies. Of course, we should repeal federal barriers to energy production and reduce taxes on all forms of energy. Therefore, I have also introduced the Affordable Gas Price Act HR 1102 which would remove governmental barriers to offshore drilling, encourage private investment in new refineries and suspend taxes on gasoline when the price at the pump reaches a certain threshold. Lowering taxes to encourage the domestic production of energy and getting government out of the way of the American energy market is not a government giveaway; it is the way it should be in a free country.”

On the issue of the EVs, Paul has not really said anything specific. But by understanding the Libertarian views and playing by the Libertarian rules we can see where his opinion would likely fall: If a company wants to invest money and attract outside investors into building and selling EVs that is fine – but there will be no federal involvement, monetary or otherwise, what so ever.

Rick Santorum

First off, Rick Santorum does not believe in global warming and, as a Senator, voted exclusively against reducing emissions or pollution, including voting against funding of renewable energy, voting to end CAFÉ standards and voted against reducing oil usage 40% by 2025. Santorum was rated a 0% by the League of Conservation Voters. Yikes.

On his campaign website, Santorum said the country needs

“…an all-of-the-above energy policy that uses oil, natural gas, coal, and nuclear energy to power our economy and empower the American worker.”

As with Romney and Gingrich, Santorum is taking the safe (scatter shot) road in regards to alternative energy policy and an energy independent America.

Additionally, Santorum does advocate ending roadblocks to oil exploration and stopping new natural gas regulations.

“We will open up energy in America, whether it’s ANWR, whether its coal mining, whether it’s drilling, we will have a free market of energy production. And we will lead the world and we will have stable, long-term energy prices.”

Santorum has said that he would phase out all energy subsidies and opposed creating incentives for “different forms of energy that the government supports.” Santorum voted against ethanol subsidies while in Congress and in a June 2011 debate in New Hampshire, Santorum said he believes the ethanol industry is mature enough to survive without them.

Santorum also supports offshore and Arctic drilling for oil.

“It is absolutely essential that we have as much domestic supply of oil, that we build the Keystone pipeline, that we create the jobs that — that that would create, and provide oil from domestic sources.

Different from the other Republican candidates, Santorum is a major supporter of coal. For some time Santorum was a consultant, being paid $142,500 from 2010 to August 2011, to Consol Energy one of the largest coal mining companies in the United States.

While Romney has attacked EV manufactures and Gingrich has written books promoting their use, Santorum has been rather mute on the topic. Santorum is, however, a proponent of ethanol use in vehicles, saying that all U.S. vehicles should be required to burn ethanol and other bio fuels in addition to gasoline while speaking to the Iowa Renewable Fuels Association, even though he voted against ethanol subsidies while in office.

Overall the four remaining Republican candidates have different views on EVs – some negative, some positive, and some none at all. However, all of the Republican candidates are for alternative fuel use and American energy independence…which is the same thing that every President since Dwight Eisenhower has said.

If nothing else, it is important to know where the Presidential candidates stand on America’s energy future. If anything will define this nation in the coming years, it will be the looming energy crisis. Whoever is elected President in November needs to have a clear, concise plan, but it is up to voters to figure out who truly has America’s best interests at heart.

Source: Gas2.0

Global hybrid and plug-in truck sales will almost double this year

Global hybrid and plug-in truck sales will almost double this year as more companies and public entities turn to advanced powertrains to cut fuel costs, green-technology research firm Pike Research said.

In 2012, hybrid and electric-drive truck sales around the world will reach about 19,000 vehicles and will increase by more than 45 percent for each of the next five years until it hits more than 100,000 vehicles by the end of 2017, Pike Research said.

The increase reflects a combination of a broader range of electric-drive models for utility vehicles and a rebound in the retail industry, which will free up cash for companies to pay more for alt-fuel vehicles, according to Pike Research senior analyst Dave Hurst. Industry analysts have predicted rapid growth for electric-drive trucks because of the potentially substantial fuel-cost savings relative to conventional diesel trucks, which usually get well below 10 miles per gallon.

AT&T, Coca-Cola, FedEx and UPS are among companies that in recent years have stepped up efforts to buy hybrid or plug-in trucks in order to cut both fuel use and greenhouse-gas emissions from their fleets.


Source: Autoblog Green

Print this post Opel expanding and enhancing its LPG offerings; new 1.4L LPG Turbo EcoFlex for Astra and Meriva

The Opel Meriva can now be ordered with the 1.4 liter LPG Turbo ecoFLEX dual fuel engine. Click to enlarge.

Opel is expanding and enhancing its Liquefied Petroleum Gas (LPG) offer. The Astra 5-door hatchback, the Astra Sports Tourer and the Meriva can now be ordered with the new 1.4 liter LPG Turbo ecoFLEX engine.

The dual fuel engine can operate in LPG and gasoline mode and is available in two power versions: 103 kW/140 hp with 200 N·m/148 lb-ft of torque in the Astra 5-door and Sports Tourer and with 88 kW/120 hp with 175 N·m/129 lb-ft in the Meriva. CO₂ emissions of the Euro 5 certified engine in LPG mode are as low as 124 g/km for the Meriva, 129 g/km for the Astra 5-door and 132 g/km for the Astra Sports Tourer in the combined cycle.

The entry price for the Astra 5-door 1.4 Turbo LPG ecoFLEX is €22,670 (US$29,384), for the Astra Sports Tourer LPG €23,770 (US$30,810) and for the Meriva LPG version prices start at €22,240 (US$28,827) (all recommended retail prices in Germany, including VAT).

Their debut comes after the Corsa LPG 1.2 ecoFLEX 3- and 5-door models had their launch in June 2011, marking the start of the new generation of Opel LPG vehicles. The Corsa 1.2 LPG three door version delivers 61kW/83 hp in LPG mode with 110 g/km CO₂. (Earlier post.)

In the autumn of 2012, Opel’s ecoFLEX spectrum will be further expanded when the 1.4 Turbo LPG ecoFLEX versions of the Zafira Tourer and the Insignia are released.

LPG is part of Opel’s portfolio of alternative propulsion systems that also includes CNG models (Compressed Natural Gas: Zafira 1.6 Turbo, Zafira Tourer 1.6 CNG Turbo and Combo 1.4 CNG Turbo) as well as electric vehicles such as the Opel Ampera with range extender.

With its new LPG ecoFLEX models, Opel underscores its mission to be a leader in alternative propulsion systems and is responding to the increasing popularity of autogas throughout Europe which is driven by cost conscious and environmentally aware customers.

LPG owners can make fuel cost savings of up to 40%. In certain countries, such as Germany, there are significant tax incentives for LPG vehicle owners. LPG customers can expect up to 15% lower CO₂ emissions in LPG mode than their gasoline counterparts. In addition, the new Euro 5 standard models, Opel offers a complete LPG solution ex factory, ensuring that the LPG ecoFLEX models are delivered in high Opel quality and with the full manufacturer warranty. Since 2009, Opel has been producing LPG vehicles. Around 61,000 vehicles have been sold across Europe with around 80% in Italy alone.

The total operating range of the Astra 5-door 1.4 Turbo LPG ecoFLEX featuring a 56 liter gasoline tank and a 49 liter LPG tank is more than 1,400 kilometers (870 miles).

For its latest generation of LPG engines, Opel has carried out a significant optimization of the engine and LPG unit software so that both elements communicate better with one another. The engine can alternate easily between the LPG and the gasoline modes and adjust according to which type of fuel is being used. The engine runs more efficiently and CO₂ emissions are kept to a minimum.

Operation modes (LPG to gasoline and vice versa) are switched automatically or can be chosen manually. The Corsa, Astra and Meriva LPG models all feature a new Gasoline/LPG switch centrally located in the instrument panel, making the switch-over between the LPG and gasoline mode easy. A light is illuminated inside the switch when the vehicle is in LPG mode. As soon as the car switches into gasoline usage the light is switched off. This will also be offered in the Zafira Tourer and Insignia LPG variants for 2012.

Opel’s customized LPG storage solution has been integrated in the spare-wheel housing. This ensures that the passenger and load compartments are spacious and are not restricted. Tire repair kits are offered as standard on board all LPG vehicles.

There are more than 25,000 LPG stations in operation across Europe. With more than 6,400 LPG filling stations, Germany has the largest infrastructure in Europe. Italy has more than 2,800 stations; France more than 1,800; the Netherlands more than 1,400; and Belgium more than five hundred. In Britain, almost 600 filling stations sell LPG. Hungary has about 250 stations.

Opel’s current LPG ecoFLEX range
LPG ecoFLEX model	Fuel mode	Output (kW/hp)	N·m	Top speed (km/h)	Fuel (l/100 km)	CO2 (g/km)
Astra 5-door 1.4 Turbo	LPG Gasoline	103/140	200	200	7.9 6.0	129 141
Astra Sports Tourer 1.4 Turbo	LPG Gasoline	103/140	200	200	8.1 6.1	132 144
Meriva 1.4 Turbo	LPG Gasoline	88/120	175	187 188	7.6 6.2	124 146
Corsa 1.2 3-door	LPG Gasoline	61/83 63/85	110 115	168 170	6.8 5.5	110 129
Corsa 1.2 5-door	LPG Gasoline	61/83 63/85	110 115	168 170	7.1 5.6	115 134

Why alternative energy has a hard time: fossil fuels get 250 subsidies

If you think ending the ethanol subsidy puts all fuel sources on an equal footing, think again. While there has been a great deal of vitriol directed toward subsidies for alternative energy and plug-in vehicles, very little has been heard about the ways in which fossil fuels are given a huge advantage – and there are many. In fact, compared to the help fossil fuels are given, tax breaks for alternative energy are decidedly modest.

A new report from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development shows that fossil fuels are awarded at least 250 different subsidies. From tax breaks on exploration to development credits to tax abatements on infrastructure, the ticket for fossil fuel subsidies runs much, much higher than the oft-scrutinized funds directed at alternatives. The oil industry alone receives tens of billions each year in tax subsidies, and that's only a fraction of the total break they are given. The subsidies for fossil fuels stretch back more than a century, and are pervasive in programs at federal, state, and local levels.

More than just ethanol subsidies expired with the beginning of 2012. The whole program of grants to clean energy programs was allowed to end. Meanwhile, subsidies that help fossil fuels are increasing annually, with almost no comment.

The many different kinds of subsidies provided to fossil fuels, the different ways they are inserted into various federal and state codes, and the vast amount of lobbying carried out by these industries makes it very difficult for alternatives to get a fair shake. By ending funds for clean energy, fossil fuel supporters have kept the field as uneven as possible, protecting their own interests at a cost to both government and consumers.

Source: Autoblog Green

Chevy Volt is paid for and fueled by solar power

This story should be enough to – at the very least – give Chevrolet Volt detractors pause: a solar-powered home that pays its owner delicious double dividends.

An Orlando, FL man used the cash from selling solar-panel-generated electricity back to the grid as a down payment for his Chevrolet Volt extended-range plug-in vehicle and he's using the power from the panels to fuel the sedan, the Orlando Sentinel reported.

Bob Stonerock used the $5,600 he made during the past two years selling power generated from his roof and backyard solar panels back to the Orlando Utilities Commission as a down payment for his $46,000 Volt. Stonerock, a retired doctor, estimates that he will be able to fuel the car almost exclusively from the electricity from the solar panels that power his vehicle-recharging station.

Stonerock is one of the more than 15,000 Americans who will attempt to replace at least most of their gasoline use with electricity by purchasing vehicles such as either the Volt or battery-electric vehicles such as the Nissan Leaf and Mitsubishi i. Through the first eleven months of the year, General Motors sold just over 6,100 Volts – compared to about 8,700 Nissan Leafs – though both vehicles were constrained by limited supply for at least some of the year.

The Chevy Volt can go about 35 miles on electric power alone before a gas-powered on-board generator kicks in to provide an additional 340 miles or so on a full tank. In November, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and Department of Energy named the Volt the fourth-most fuel-efficient vehicle sold in the United States. The federal agencies' latest edition of their Fuel Economy Guide rates the Volt at 60 miles per gallon of gasoline equivalent, which trailed only the Mitsubishi i, Nissan Leaf and Ford Transit Connect Electric battery-electric vehicles.


Source: Autoblog Green

Congress Ends Taxpayer Funding of Ethanol Subsidies

When the U.S. Congress adjourned for the holidays on Friday, December 23, its departure sealed the fate of subsidized ethanol production.

During its session, the Congress did not renew a tax break for U.S. production of corn-based ethanol that had become increasingly unpopular across a wide area of the political spectrum.

The tax credit amounted to 45 cents per gallon of ethanol that was blended into gasoline. It had been in place since 1980.

Corn lobby loses support

As The Detroit News reported the next day, by some estimates, total subsidies to the ethanol industry may have reached $45 billion over that period. That is several times the total loans, grants, and tax credits provided thus far to the U.S. electric-car industry.

Gas pump

In June, the Senate voted 73-27 to end the tax break. That vote, attached to an economic development bill that was stalled, was viewed as symbolic--letting Congressmembers go on record against continuing the subsidies without effectively ending them.

It proved to be a test case that demonstrated the waning support in Congress for the corn-based ethanol industry. Three weeks later, an agreement was reached to end the subsidies for real--and it held for the rest of the year.

Ending the ethanol tax breaks is projected to save about $2 billion over several years. Of that total, two-thirds is to be applied to cutting the national debt, although it represents just one-tenth of 1 percent of the total national debt of $14.3 trillion.

Half as productive as Brazil

Using corn is the least productive way to make ethanol, at roughly 300 gallons per acre of feedstock. The Brazilian ethanol industry gets twice as many gallons per acre using sugar cane, and other feedstocks like switchgrass have been projected to produce up to 1,200 gallons per acre.

Development of cellulosic ethanol refineries that use non-corn feedstocks have lagged commercially, despite several pilot projects.

U.S. corn ethanol had further been protected by a 54-cents-per-gallon tariff on imports of ethanol from other countries (meaning Brazil). That import duty was also ended by the departure of Congress for the year.

But with sugar prices high in Brazil, imports of ethanol aren't likely to spike in the short term.

Conflict with 2007 mandate

That leads to a longer-range question: Will there be sufficient ethanol produced and imported to meet the escalating ethanol-use requirements of the 2007 Energy Independence and Security Act passed by Congress?

Proposed EPA E15 gasoline pump warning label for ethanol content

That law requires that 36 billion gallons of ethanol be blended into U.S. vehicle fuel by 2022--which is more than three times the 11.1 billion gallons used in 2010. The requirement rises to 15 billion gallons for 2015.

Congress has blocked the EPA's approval of E15 gasoline, which has up to 15 percent ethanol, largely at the request of automakers and others who fear damage to engines not designed to handle fuel with that volume of ethanol. The current standard, in places for decades, permits up to 10 percent ethanol in pump gasoline.

So while Congress has ended tax breaks, it may have set up the fuel industry for failure on the 2007 mandate by explicitly banning E15 gasoline.

Until that is resolved, the politics of ethanol are likely to remain fractious.

Source: Green Car Reports

E85 Becoming Harder to Locate Than Electric Charge Stations

Despite millions of dollars of commitment from automakers like Ford and General Motors, finding somewhere to fill your flex-fuel car with E85 is now officially harder than finding somewhere to recharge a plug-in car.

In fact, according to Bloomberg, the number of electric car charging stations in the U.S. outnumbers E85 filling stations by two to one, despite a total of 7.6 million flex-fuel vehicles on U.S. roads today.

But if so many automakers have now embraced flex-fuel technology, why are there fewer than 2,500 gas stations in the U.S. that offer E85? And what does it mean for the future of biofuels?

Ethical issues for ethanol

Around the world, most ethanol is produced from either corn or sugar cane.

Although around 95 percent of all E85 is produced from domestically-farmed corn, some academics question the ethics of producing fuel from food crops when the world’s population is struggling to feed itself.

FlexFuel badge on E85-capable 2009 Chevrolet HHR

Moreover, in countries like Brazil -- where rainforests are being illegally cleared to make way for more biofuel crops -- the demand to grow biofuel crops is having a detrimental effect on indigenous flora and fauna.

And for some religions, there’s even ethical questions that suggest using Ethanol-based fuels is nothing more than a sin.

Subsidies, import protection to end

Earlier this summer, the U.S. Senate voted to end subsidies for the production of ethanol in the U.S, killing the 45-cents-per-gallon ethanol blending credit that farmers and ethanol producers had been able to claim.

At the same time, the U.S. Senate ended the 54-cents-per-gallon import duty on ethanol imports, making it cheaper to import E85 from outside the U.S.

Sadly, importing ethanol means facing the same problems as buying foreign oil, including being subjected to massive price fluctuations, not to mention facing the number of political and ethical challenges associated with buying ethanol from countries like Brazil.

In short, ethanol has become a political hot potato.

E85 station in Los Angeles

Cheaper, but less energy

This summer, the price of corn-based ethanol prices reached a three-year high, driven in part by a lower-than-expected corn harvest yield.

Secondly, E85 contains less energy per gallon than gasoline. As a consequence, anyone driving a flex-fueled car on E85 will discover that they can’t travel as far on a full tank, meaning they’ll have to fill up more often.

And that’s the double-whammy. When ethanol was considerably cheaper than gasoline, people didn’t mind filling up more often if they could get substantial savings. But with E85 becoming increasingly expensive, flex-fuel drivers are happy to use gasoline instead.

Flex-fuel cars: no range anxiety

As the name suggests, flex-fuel vehicles can use gasoline, E85, or a mixture of the two as fuel.

2009 Chevrolet HHR E85

As a consequence, there’s no onus on the car driver to fill up on E85. And unlike plug-in car drivers who have to plan their longer trips to include somewhere to charge up, flex-fuel drivers just stop whenever they come across a gas station, regardless of which fuel is sold.

In fact, until carmakers started labeling them with "FlexFuel" badges and fitting bright yellow gas caps, hundreds of thousands of drivers of such vehicles had no idea they were driving a car that could run on anything other than gasoline.

For a Flex-fuel driver, finding somewhere to refill that sells E85 isn’t a prerequisite of making a long-distance trip, while electric car owners need to find somewhere to recharge for trips beyond the range of their car.

Source: Green Car Reports