Photo credit: The Dirt
Below, are today’s three chosen agricultural-related news picks.
1) A DIY Verticle Urban Garden Using 2-liter Pop Bottles: Phil Stamper posted instructions on how to make a hanging bottle garden. This is a verticle urban garden system that anybody can do with some rope and empty pop bottles. It comes from the Brazilian design firm, Rosenbaum, and it was such a hit that they released these instructions so that they are available to everyone. (Please go to the source to view the instructions.)
2) ENERGY: Is the Future Micro-Grids? “One of the most under-reported stories in the U.S. energy industry today is Connecticut’s ambitious electricity pilot project—one that could have a widespread ripple effect across the country. On July 24, state government officials announced plans for nine micro-grid projects as part of a Micro-grid Pilot Program aimed at ensuring electricity grid resilience and reliability during severe weather events. “Micro-grids” are essentially small-scale electricity generation and distribution systems that integrate various distributed energy resources and can be managed locally and, if necessary, independently from the main grid. Diesel-powered micro-grids are common in the rural areas of many developing countries such as Haiti, Indonesia, and the Philippines, and some military bases, telecommunications bases, and Internet server farms have done the same, in order to ensure a steady flow of power even if a natural disaster or terrorist attack should take down the main grid. … “
3) How much E85 would be consumed if we gave it away? That is my question for Bruce Babcock (of Colbert Report fame) at Iowa State, who suggests that we need an economic incentive to get past the ethanol blend wall by having E85 available at more stations and by reducing its price in a piece titled, “Price It and They Will Buy: How E85 Can Break the Blend Wall”. (Pretty sure I was not his intended audience.) He says, “The resulting demand curve for ethanol above the E10 blend wall suggests E85 consumption of about one billion gallons if E85 were priced to generate a six percent reduction in fuel costs. If the price were lowered further to generate a 15 percent reduction then about two billion gallons could be consumed, and a 30 percent reduction would be needed to induce three billion gallons of consumption. … rather than being a physical barrier to increased ethanol consumption, the E10 blend wall is an economic barrier that can be overcome by increasing the incentive for drivers to use E85 to fuel their vehicles.” K.M.: Or, maybe it would help if you labeled it what it really is. Hardly anyone is aware of the fact that the ASTM lowered the minimum requirement of ethanol in E85 to 51 percent “E51″ in early 2012… “to ensure that ethanol fuel blends for flex-fuel vehicles can meet seasonal vapor pressure requirements in all regions of the country.” Next up, I’d like to see reports from Babcock on 1) the non-mandated use amounts of E85 in our top five corn producing states, 2) the average ethanol blend produced under the E85 label today, 3) who will be paying for the 30 percent price discount of E85 in his proposal and what will that cost? 4) how do your cost discount incentives for selling E85 compare to energy content in the product? and, 5) How much would your economic incentives contribute to the problems of water quality, habitat and soil loss in your state of Iowa?
(Note that the EPA has recently indicated that it will reduce targets in 2014 to address “blend wall” concerns, and, the anti-ethanol sentiments and voices are heating up in Washington, on TV ads, and elsewhere.)
This news post was written and compiled by K. McDonald.