U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Publishing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001

93–027 PDF 2015

S. HRG. 113–556 

ADVANCED BIOFUELS: 

CREATING JOBS AND LOWER 

PRICES AT THE PUMP 

HEARING 

BEFORE THE

COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE, 

NUTRITION AND FORESTRY 

UNITED STATES SENATE 

ONE HUNDRED THIRTEENTH CONGRESS 

SECOND SESSION 

APRIL 8, 2014 

Printed for the use of the 

Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry 

( 

Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.fdsys.gov/ 

COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE, NUTRITION AND FORESTRY 

DEBBIE STABENOW, Michigan, Chairwoman 

PATRICK J. LEAHY, Vermont 

TOM HARKIN, Iowa 

SHERROD BROWN, OHIO 

AMY KLOBUCHAR, MINNESOTA 

MICHAEL BENNET, COLORADO 

KIRSTEN GILLIBRAND, NEW YORK 

JOE DONNELLY, INDIANA 

HEIDI HEITKAMP, NORTH DAKOTA 

ROBERT P. CASEY, PENNSYLVANIA 

JOHN WALSH, MONTANA 

THAD COCHRAN, Mississippi 

MITCH MCCONNELL, Kentucky 

PAT ROBERTS, Kansas 

SAXBY CHAMBLISS, Georgia 

JOHN BOOZMAN, Arkansas 

JOHN HOEVEN, North Dakota 

MIKE JOHANNS, Nebraska 

CHARLES E. GRASSLEY, Iowa 

JOHN THUNE, South Dakota 

CHRISTOPHER J. ADAMO, Majority Staff Director 

JONATHAN J. CORDONE, Majority Chief Counsel 

JESSICA L. WILLIAMS, Chief Clerk 

THOMAS ALLEN HAWKS, Minority Staff Director 

ANNE C. HAZLETT, Minority Chief Counsel and Senior Advisor 

(II) 

(III) 

C O N T E N T S 

Page 

HEARING(S): 

Advanced Biofuels: Creating Jobs and Lower Prices at the Pump ..................... 1 

Tuesday April 8, 2014 

STATEMENTS PRESENTED BY SENATORS 

Stabenow, Hon. Debbie, U.S. Senator from the State of Michigan, Chairwoman, Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry ............................ 1 

Cochran, Hon. Thad, U.S. Senator from the State of Mississippi ....................... 3 

Panel I 

Childress, Richard, President and Chief Executive Officer, Richard Childress 

Racing, LLC, Welcome, North Carolina ............................................................. 4 

Koninckx, Jan, Ph.D., Global Business Director for Biorefineries, Dupont 

Industrial Biosciences, Wilmington, Delaware .................................................. 6 

Coleman, Brooke, Executive Director, Advanced Ethanol Council, Boston, 

Massachusetts ...................................................................................................... 7 

Arora, Sumesh M., Ph.D., Vice President, Innovate Mississippi, and Director, 

Strategic Biomass Solutions, Ridgeland, Mississippi ........................................ 9 

Young, Nancy N., Vice President, Environmental Affairs, Airlines for America, Washington, DC ............................................................................................ 11 

APPENDIX 

PREPARED STATEMENTS: 

Cochran, Hon. Thad ......................................................................................... 30 

Arora, Sumesh M. ............................................................................................. 31 

Childress, Richard ............................................................................................ 37 

Coleman, Brooke ............................................................................................... 43 

Koninckx, Jan ................................................................................................... 58 

Young, Nancy N. ............................................................................................... 64 

DOCUMENT(S) SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD: 

Arora, Sumesh M.: 

Supporting Testimony for the Record ............................................................. 78 

QUESTION AND ANSWER: 

Arora, Sumesh M.: 

Written response to questions from Hon. Debbie Stabenow ......................... 106 

Written response to questions from Hon. Thad Cochran .............................. 109 

Childress, Richard: 

Written response to questions from Hon. Debbie Stabenow ......................... 113 

Written response to questions from Hon. Thad Cochran .............................. 113 

Written response to questions from Hon. Tom Harkin ................................. 113 

Coleman, Brooke: 

Written response to questions from Hon. Debbie Stabenow ......................... 116 

Written response to questions from Hon. Thad Cochran .............................. 117 

Written response to questions from Hon. Joe Donnelly ................................ 118 

Koninckx, Jan: 

Written response to questions from Hon. Debbie Stabenow ......................... 121 

Written response to questions from Hon. Thad Cochran .............................. 123 

Page

IV 

Young, Nancy N.: 

Written response to questions from Hon. Debbie Stabenow ......................... 125 

(1) 

ADVANCED BIOFUELS: 

CREATING JOBS AND LOWER 

PRICES AT THE PUMP 

Tuesday, April 8, 2014 

UNITED STATES SENATE, 

COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE, NUTRITION AND FORESTRY, 

Washington, DC 

The Committee met, pursuant to other business, at 9:58 a.m., in 

Room 328A, Russell Senate Office Building, Hon. Debbie Stabenow, 

Chairwoman of the Committee, presiding. 

Present: Senators Stabenow, Harkin, Brown, Klobuchar, Bennet, 

Gillibrand, Donnelly, Heitkamp, Casey, Cochran, Chambliss, Boozman, Hoeven, Grassley, and Thune. 

STATEMENT OF HON. DEBBIE STABENOW, U.S. SENATOR 

FROM THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, CHAIRWOMAN, COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE, NUTRITION AND FORESTRY 

Chairwoman STABENOW. So we would invite our witnesses to join 

us today. We are very, very pleased to have this hearing on Advanced Biofuels: Creating Jobs and Lower Prices at the Pump. I 

think, a really important group of people representing many, many 

different sectors that are involved with biofuels. So we will take 

just a moment to welcome you to come up to the table. 

[Pause.] 

Chairwoman STABENOW. Well, good morning again. We are moving to the second portion of our hearing, and again, we will pause 

for a business meeting as soon as we have a quorum. We expect 

to have a quorum in just a few moments, so thanks to all the members for coming, I know, as close to 10 o’clock as we could to do 

the business portion. I want to thank all of you for being here. 

We have heard for years that advanced biofuels are just around 

the corner. Well, we are here. We are at the point where it is actually happening instead of having one more hearing where we hear, 

‘‘Five years from now, we will have cellulosic ethanol.’’ We are excited to have people here today that will be able to touch on some 

of the success stories that are out there. I want to just highlight 

a few. 

INEOS Bio has announced it is producing cellulosic ethanol at a 

commercial scale. Sapphire Energy announced that it had paid off 

its entire $54 million USDA Energy Title loan and will be producing 100 barrels of green crude per day from algae by 2015. 

POET’s Project Liberty broke ground last spring and is on pace 

to begin producing cellulosic ethanol from corn stover this year. 

2 

DuPont, which is represented on our panel today—very pleased— 

is expected to produce cellulosic ethanol from stover in Iowa later 

this year. 

As I have said before, as we all know, the farm bill is a jobs bill, 

and that is why I am so proud of the work that we all did together 

in developing a robust energy title. The Energy Title funds critical 

programs to help our farmers produce energy from non-food sources 

and helps companies get low interest loans for those facilities. And, 

of course, all of that creates jobs. 

We are going to hear from representatives of companies that are 

out there doing just that: creating jobs and growing rural economies while producing advanced biofuels, which ultimately help us 

become more energy independent and lower our gas prices at the 

pump. 

Some of you may be surprised to learn that my home State of 

Michigan was actually an early adopter of ethanol in 1896. I was 

not there at the time, but in 1896, Henry Ford designed his first 

car, the Quadricycle, which we all know as the ‘‘horseless carriage,’’ 

to run on pure ethanol. When it was released in 1908, Ford’s Model 

T was able to run on gasoline, ethanol, or a combination of the two. 

Henry Ford continued to advocate for ethanol as a fuel, but the 

lower price and abundance of oil made it more attractive to consumers at that time. Interesting how our policies have affected all 

of that. 

Yet today we are still working to make ethanol more competitive 

in the U.S. We would love the same tax policies for ethanol that 

we have had for oil, I would say as an editorial comment, and we 

do know, though, that in other countries we are seeing a different 

mix and competitiveness. 

I was in Brazil with Secretary Vilsack last summer. Brazil’s gasoline is blended with ethanol at a nearly 30-percent rate. In fact, 

they have lower gas prices because of the higher blends. Meanwhile, here in the United States, ethanol makes up 10 percent of 

our fuel supply. 

An Iowa State University study found that, in 2010, using ethanol reduced the cost of gas by 89 cents a gallon across the country, 

and by as much as $1.37 in the Midwest. These are enormous savings for American families. 

In the U.S. we consumed about 138 billion gallons of gasoline in 

2010. That comes out to about 446 gallons per person or 892 gallons for a family of four, and when you think about that, well, what 

do those numbers mean, 892 gallons? Well, you could drive from 

D.C. to Los Angeles and back four times on 892 gallons. That family could have saved $794 in 2010 because of biofuels. According to 

USDA numbers, that $794 comes to up to 5 weeks’ worth of groceries. 

Biofuels are making a difference and could make an even bigger 

difference, and that is what we are here to talk about today. It is 

our goal to make sure we move to non-food-based advanced 

biofuels, and it is happening, and in places that some may not be 

aware of. 

As we will hear today, some of our airlines have undertaken 

their own biofuels initiatives because it makes good business sense 

3 

for them to do so. But to continue growing this industry, we need 

policies that support it. 

This Committee and Congress took an important step forward 

passing the farm bill with the funding for the Energy Title. Now 

we need to provide certainty through a strong, Renewable Fuel 

Standard and tax credits to support long-term investments in our 

energy future. Getting off foreign oil is in our strategic interest, 

and doing so, we will be saving money and be saving lives. 

So we thank all of you for being here, and I would turn now to 

Senator Cochran for his opening statement. 

STATEMENT OF HON. THAD COCHRAN, U.S. SENATOR FROM 

THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI 

Senator COCHRAN. Madam Chair, thank you very much. I am 

pleased to join you in welcoming our distinguished panel of witnesses, one of whom is from my State of Mississippi. Dr. Arora is 

here. He is involved in an initiative for the commercialization of 

advanced biofuel technologies through the so-called Strategic Biomass Solution Initiative. I am anxious to hear more about this and 

to learn more about the questions that confront the policymakers, 

both in the administration and in Congress, to examine these alternatives to traditional sources of energy and enterprise. 

Thank you very much. 

Chairwoman STABENOW. Thank you very much. 

I understand that we will have two more members that we need 

for a quorum in just a moment, so I am going to proceed to introduce our panel, and at that point I think we will be in a place 

where we can stop for our business meeting and then proceed with 

the panel. We are so pleased to have all of you with us today. 

Our first witness on the panel is Mr. Richard Childress, the 

president and CEO of Richard Childress Racing. It is always good 

to see you, Richard. He serves on the Board of Directors at Growth 

Energy. As a driver, Mr. Childress earned 76 top ten finishes in 

285 races, and his racing team has logged 200 overall NASCAR victories and 14 NASCAR championships, and I can say as a 

NASCAR fan, it is always good to see you at the races. I know you 

will be coming to Michigan in just a bit, so I look forward to seeing 

you. 

Our second witness today is Mr. Brooke Coleman—we are so 

pleased you are here—executive director of the Advanced Ethanol 

Council. Mr. Coleman has been involved in the energy and environmental sectors at the regulatory and policy level since 1997. He has 

founded or co-founded several organizations or projects, including 

the Advanced Ethanol Council, the New Fuels Alliance, the California Renewable Fuels Partnership, the Northeast Biofuels Collaborative, and the Renewable Energy Action Project. 

Our third witness is Dr. Jan Koninckx, global business director 

for biorefineries at DuPont Industrial Biosciences. Dr. Koninckx 

oversees the development and commercialization of advanced 

biofuel technologies like cellulosic ethanol and biobutanol. Dr. 

Koninckx has worked for DuPont for over 20 years, has served as 

chair of the board for Butamax Advanced Biofuels LLC since its inception in 2009, and is also a member of the Board of Directors of 

Vivergo Fuels. Welcome. Good to have you. 

4 

Our fourth witness is Dr. Sumesh Arora, and Senator Cochran 

has already mentioned him, and I will give just a little bit more 

information. We are so pleased that you are here. Vice president 

and director of Strategic Biomass Solutions at Innovate Mississippi, a nonprofit organization focused on creating technologybased economic development in Mississippi. He launched the Renewable Energy Venture Startup Academy in 2010 and has served 

as Mississippi’s representative to the Governor’s Biofuels Coalition 

since 2006. 

Our fifth and final witness is Nancy Young, vice president of environmental affairs at Airlines for America, the oldest and largest 

airline trade association. Ms. Young is an environmental attorney 

with more than 20 years of experience. At A4A, Ms. Young directs 

environmental programs, provides counsel on environmental issues, 

and represents A4A in international negotiations. She also participates in several airline environmental initiatives, including the 

Farm to Fly initiative—I need to know more about that; Farm to 

Fly, that is very interesting—Commercial Aviation Alternative 

Fuels Initiative, and Advisory Committee to the Aviation Sustainability Center. 

So we are pleased to have such a distinguished panel with us, 

and we are waiting for one more member before we can do our 

votes. 

So we are going to proceed with Mr. Childress. We are so glad 

that you are here today. Welcome. 

Mr. CHILDRESS. Thank you. 

Chairwoman STABENOW. We would like you to go ahead. 

Mr. CHILDRESS. Oh, okay. 

Chairwoman STABENOW. We would like you to share with us 5 

minutes’ worth of remarks. You can watch the buttons on there, 

and then anything that you would like to give us further in writing 

we would be happy to accept as well. So good morning. 

STATEMENT OF RICHARD CHILDRESS, PRESIDENT AND CHIEF 

EXECUTIVE OFFICER, RICHARD CHILDRESS RACING, LLC, 

WELCOME, NORTH CAROLINA 

Mr. CHILDRESS. Thank you. I have sent in written testimony, but 

I will. Thank you, Chairman Stabenow, Ranking Member Cochran, 

and members of the Senate Agriculture Committee. Thank you for 

allowing me this opportunity today to tell you about all of the 

things that 15-percent ethanol is doing in NASCAR racing today. 

I was raised on a tobacco farm. As a kid, I know how tough it 

was to see farmers and live as a farm kid. But once it is in your 

blood, it is in your blood, so today I am in the farming business, 

been in it for 30 years. I have vineyard, Angus cattle. We raise our 

own hay, wheat, corn, soybeans. So I know what it is like for the 

farmers today, and ethanol is definitely a great plus for our farmers in America today. 

I am also an avid sportsman and conservationist. I am on the 

Board of Directors for the NRA. I served 6 years with the Congressional Sportsmen’s Foundation. Also, as you said earlier, I am on 

the Board of Directors for Growth Energy. Growth Energy is the 

country’s leading trade association of ethanol and renewable fuel 

products. 

5 

I have been involved in NASCAR for 45 years both as a driver 

and owner. I have seen a lot of changes. For those that don’t understand NASCAR, we have over 70 million race fans. We rank second 

only to the NFL in TV viewing and audiences. 

NASCAR always looks at what the manufacturers are doing. 

When we were running leaded fuel back years ago, NASCAR was 

running leaded fuel. When they went to unleaded fuel, we went 

along with them with unleaded fuel. When they decided to go with 

an ethanol blend of fuel, in 2010 NASCAR started looking at ways 

and what was the right, correct blend to use. They came up with— 

after many tests, they came up with E15 was the fuel to use in our 

race cars. 

As RCR, we did our own testing. We did a lot of testing. We tested all the way up to E30. I wish we were here today talking about 

how we were all running E30 in our cars. 

Nothing but positive results came out of our tests. Our engines 

ran cooler. We made more horsepower. Ethanol makes more octane, 

so it makes more horsepower; less carbon buildup; better emissions; and our parts, when we tore the engines down, looked much 

better. 

Since 2011, NASCAR has raced more than 5 million miles, put 

5 million miles on E15. That is some of the most toughest racing, 

toughest demand on an engine you could get. We turn those engines over 9500 RPMs week in and week out for 4 and 5 hours. 

From a consumer’s standpoint—and I better hurry. From a consumer’s standpoint, more testing was done on E15, more than any 

other fuel approved by the EPA. The Department of Energy tested 

86 vehicles for more than 6 million miles. With the Department of 

Energy’s testing results, the EPA approved a waiver for E15 in all 

vehicles 2001 and newer, which is more than 80 percent of the vehicles on the highway today. Studies show by moving America to 

E15 blends or better, we would create 136,000 jobs, limit greenhouse emissions, and reduce the demand for foreign oil. 

The economic impact of ethanol today to America is in billions. 

It creates jobs, farm equipment sales. If ethanol is the future for 

America—I feel ethanol is the future for America. The challenges 

we have today with our security, we cannot depend on foreign oils. 

We cannot keep sending our dollars overseas to maybe used 

against us someday. The main thing is our children and grandchildren, we have got to think about them for the future and the 

energy sources that they will have in the future. 

With that said, thank you for letting me testify, and God bless 

America. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Childress can be found on page 

37 in the appendix.] 

Chairwoman STABENOW. Thank you so much, Mr. Childress. We 

are so pleased to have you here and wish you luck with your vehicles racing. 

Mr. CHILDRESS. Thank you. 

[Whereupon at 10:14 a.m., the Committee proceeded to other 

business and reconvened at 10:18 a.m.] 

Chairwoman STABENOW. We want to continue with our very important testimony. We thank all of you for your patience as we 

stopped, but let us proceed right now. Dr. Koninckx, welcome. 

6 

STATEMENT OF JAN KONINCKX, PH.D., GLOBAL BUSINESS DIRECTOR FOR BIOREFINERIES, DUPONT INDUSTRIAL BIOSCIENCES, WILMINGTON, DELAWARE 

Mr. KONINCKX. Thank you, and good morning, Chairman Stabe- now and members of the Committee. As a responsible member of 

a large public company that commercializes technology all the time, 

it is my pleasure to be here with you today and share my personal 

knowledge of the incredible advances that companies like DuPont 

are making in this field of biofuels. Science companies like ourselves share the credit for these 

achievements with the entrepreneurial farmers across the heartland. These growers work with us every day to realize the vision 

of the Renewable Fuel Standard. It is because of their courage and 

because of their dedication that I am able to sit here today and confirm that ethanol, cellulosic ethanol, is viable and growing as a new 

industry in 2014. How did we get there? 

Chairwoman STABENOW. Let me ask, is the microphone on? You 

may want to speak a little bit more directly into it if the red light 

is not on. 

Mr. KONINCKX. Okay. I will come closer. The red light is—okay. 

Sorry. How did we get there? Allow me to give you a brief recap of DuPont’s role in the development of this technology and an update 

of exactly where we stand today. DuPont began its research into cellulosic ethanol a decade ago, and over those years we have collaborated with public institutions, 

with academia, with private entities, to overcome the tremendous 

technical and practical obstacles we face. Our challenge outlined in 

the RFS was to bring advanced renewable fuels like cellulosic, a 

technology that was yet to be created, and put the U.S. on a path 

towards improved energy security, lowered greenhouse gases, and 

economic opportunities for rural economies in America. 

This was no small feat. We had to unlock the sugars trapped in 

biomass, biochemically convert them into advanced fuel, and create 

an entirely new supply chain. Step by step, with our partners, we 

knocked out these technical challenges, and in 2009 we opened a 

one-of-a-kind demonstration facility Tennessee. Today this facility 

continues to churn out data and know-how on how to process and 

convert all different types of biomass to fuel. 

The first feedstock we worked on was corn stover, and it is that 

feedstock that we will be using in our commercial-scale cellulosic 

ethanol facility that is currently under construction in Nevada, 

Iowa. 

For the past 4 years, DuPont has been out in the fields with 

farmers working together to devise an entirely new supply chain 

that will feed this 30 million gallon per year biorefinery, and that 

supply chain and the biorefinery are fully sustainable. Remember, 

this is a supply chain that was never before attempted. 

For some perspective, the bales, the stover bales that we will be 

using are taller than I am at 8 feet, and certainly weigh much 

more at half a ton each. We will harvest these, bale them, store 

them, and transport them—in total, more than 700,000 of these 

bales each year. We will do this in a way that is fully sustainable, 

7 

and that is an achievement we are particularly proud of and one 

that our fossil fuel competitors cannot even contemplate achieving. 

We share that credit with partners like the USDA, with whom we 

developed standards for biomass harvest and land management. 

The bottom line here is that, driven by the RFS, we have completely reinvented how we fuel our vehicles using renewable fuel, 

and we do so without adding additional CO2 into the atmosphere. 

DuPont has more than 210 years of experience of bringing scientific 

innovation to market, and in my estimation, we have never delivered this type of disruptive technology this fast. 

It is not the end of the story. It is actually the beginning. We 

start with unlocking the sugars in cellulose for biofuels. Tomorrow 

these same sugars and supply chains will enable a whole new 

world of bio-based chemicals and materials, delivering on the promise of an economy that is in part resourced by renewable agriculture. 

DuPont is already working on it. Since 2006, we have been delivering plant starch-based product, which is used in carpeting, in 

automobile parts, in de-icing fluids, and other personal and industrial applications. Many more of these advances will be possible 

when the supply chains that I have just described mature, enabling 

lower costs and higher efficiencies. 

In closing, I emphasize that the Renewable Fuel Standard works 

as intended. Seven years ago, this Congress set the country on a 

course to change its energy destiny, and DuPont, a historic American company, answered that call. This year, we are going to be 

bringing biomass into our refinery fit for the 21st century, one 

fueled not by what is drilled up from the ground, but what actually 

is grown from it, a modern technical marvel that is a model on how 

to create jobs in rural communities, work with our environment not 

against it, and give consumers an opportunity to choose homegrown renewable fuels at the pump. 

DuPont is proud to be part of this success story, and we thank 

the Committee for your continued interest and support for this innovative field. Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Dr. Koninckx can be found on page 

58 in the appendix.] 

Chairwoman STABENOW. Thank you very much. 

Mr. Coleman, welcome. 

STATEMENT OF BROOKE COLEMAN, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, 

ADVANCED ETHANOL COUNCIL, BOSTON, MASSACHUSETTS 

Mr. COLEMAN. Thank you. I will get this microphone just right 

here. Good morning, Chairwoman Stabenow, Ranking Member 

Cochran, and members of the Committee. My name is Brooke Coleman. I am the executive director of the Advanced Ethanol Council. 

The AEC represents worldwide leaders in the effort to develop and 

commercialize the next generation of ethanol fuels and products 

made from wood chips, agriculture residue, energy crops, municipal 

solid waste, and algae. My chairman, of course, is Bill Brady of 

Mascoma, which is in Michigan. 

I have submitted a fairly substantial written testimony that you 

will be happy I am not going to try to rehash here, but I want to 

touch on a few points. 

8 

I think it is safe to say that the biofuel issue can be volatile. The 

question is: Why? I think if you look at the trajectory of the 

biofuels industry and who is being forced to change, you will have 

your answer. In just 10 years, fledgling industries like ethanol and 

biodiesel have emerged to create hundreds of thousands of jobs and 

displaced the need for billions of gallons of petroleum imports annually. 

If you look at perhaps the most controversial biofuel, ethanol, 

you will find that it is also the most disruptive to the status quo. 

The ethanol industry now supports hundreds of thousands of jobs 

in the U.S. all by itself and wants to create consumer choice at the 

pump with fuels like E15 and E85. They are a target for a reason. 

Now the industry, I am happy to say, is evolving. While the Wall 

Street Journal editorial page insists that the advanced biofuel industry is underperforming, our production capacity actually exceeded the RFS targets last year by 250 million gallons. 

From an investment perspective, a recent analysis found that the 

United States ranks number one for advanced biofuel development 

among 69 countries, attracting almost 70 percent of global ventures 

in advanced biofuels. 

The news is also good when it comes to cellulosic biofuels. It is 

easy to say we are finally breaking through at commercial scale, 

but the truth is we are just 6 years past the signing of RFS2, and 

financial markets were frozen for much of this period. Yet DuPont’s 

plant in Nevada, Iowa, Abengoa’s plant in Hugoton, Kansas, and 

POET–DSM’s plant in Emmetsburg, Iowa, are all scheduled to 

start up this year. Each of these plants is creating new multi-million-dollar markets for local farmers making cellulosic ethanol out 

of agricultural residue. 

Some of the numbers are very interesting. DuPont’s feedstock 

network is around 500 farmers strong. At one point during construction, Abengoa had roughly 1,000 workers and engineers on 

site in a town of 1,400. POET–DSM’s facility will produce enough 

renewable electricity as a co-product to power itself and the grain 

ethanol facility next door. That is the good news. 

The bad news is—and I think I have said this before—the oil industry has enough money to make it seem like it is raining on a 

sunny day. The very programs that put us ahead of Brazil and 

China, like the Energy Title in the farm bill and the Federal RFS, 

are under fire from big industries that do not want to see valueadded agriculture in rural America and do not want to see consumer choice at the pump. 

The target is not the three projects that I mentioned but, rather, 

the next three dozen projects in the cellulosic ethanol biofuel pipeline that I have not mentioned. 

While my time is limited, I think it is also important to refute 

some of the common arguments made against us to correct the 

record. 

The oil industry claims we do not need biofuels anymore because 

we have this boom in domestic oil production. We do not have anything against the oil industry. While it is true that we produce 

marginally more oil than we used to, up from about 7 to 10 percent 

of the world’s supply, we consume more than 20 percent of the 

world’s oil at steadily increasing prices. So foreign oil dependence 

9 

is sort of like a gambling addiction. We are gambling one fewer 

night per week but at more expensive tables and calling it 

progress. With fiscal responsibility in mind, there is simply no bigger drain on the U.S. economy and revenues than foreign oil dependence. 

On the issue of pump prices, oil industry executives have the 

tendency to be quite forthcoming after they retire. For example, 

former Shell Oil President John Hofmeister recently stated, ‘‘[w]e 

need a competitor for oil. We need to open the market to replacement fuels. Competition will drive transportation fuel prices down, 

structurally and sustainably.’’ This is exactly what is happening. 

Energy economist Philip Verleger, who served as an adviser to 

both Ford and Carter, recently said, ‘‘the U.S. renewable fuels program...translates to consumers paying between $0.50 and $1.50 per 

gallon less for gasoline’’ by adding the equivalent of Ecuador to extremely tight world liquid fuel markets. 

Finally, we are aware of the livestock industry blaming biofuels 

for increases in the price of its feed. I know this is a difficult issue 

for agriculture. I would point out that corn prices today are about 

the same as they were in 2008 when these programs started. But 

the issue is bigger than that for advanced biofuels. We remember 

the downside of sub-$2 bushel of corn when U.S. farmers were 

price takers, selling oversupplied grains at below cost and struggling to make a living. Congress responded in part by committing 

to policies promoting value-added agriculture. We believe that Congress was right to take this path, that the development of cellulosic 

biofuels is a key part of this vision, and that more prosperity and 

new markets in rural America are a good thing. 

The question for our industry is no longer whether we are going 

to commercialize. Globally speaking, it is when and where. The 

programs you have established are the right programs, and if allowed to work, they will pay dividends for generations. 

Thank you for the privilege of speaking today, and I look forward 

to your questions. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Coleman can be found on page 

43 in the appendix.] 

Chairwoman STABENOW. Thank you very much. 

Dr. Arora, welcome. 

STATEMENT OF SUMESH M. ARORA, PH.D., VICE PRESIDENT, 

INNOVATE MISSISSIPPI, AND DIRECTOR, STRATEGIC BIOMASS SOLUTIONS, RIDGELAND, MISSISSIPPI 

Mr. ARORA. Good morning. Chairwoman Stabenow, Ranking 

Member Cochran, and members of the Committee, thank you for 

the opportunity to testify today in support of advanced biofuels. My 

name is Sumesh Arora, and I am the vice president of Innovate 

Mississippi, a nonprofit organization dedicated to technology-and 

innovation-based economic development, and I also serve as adjunct faculty in entrepreneurship. 

I hope to provide a perspective on how advanced biofuels and bioenergy options may be accelerated in the southeastern U.S., where 

considerable activity is already taking place on multiple fronts. 

Today I will address five challenges and opportunities for furthering these goals. 

10 

2014 is a breakthrough year for the advanced biofuels industry, 

but this industry is still in its infancy. Currently there is no dominant design for advanced biofuels technologies or feedstocks, which 

means that many different technologies are being perfected that 

can use a broad array of feedstocks. This is leading to many technical and business innovations ranging from deploying very largescale biorefineries, as we heard, to small modular and even on-farm 

systems. Achieving the concept of dominant design makes a technology more bankable and much easier to be adopted by the 

masses. However, there is a significant need to educate entrepreneurs and investors to look at risks in five key areas: technology, markets, management, finance, and execution. 

Innovate Mississippi has developed the Renewable Energy Venture Startup Academy for training entrepreneurs to evaluate and 

mitigate these risks. REVSup workshops have been conducted all 

over the country in the last 3 years. Furthermore, linking business 

plan competitions and business accelerators around the country is 

critical to encourage new investment in these ventures. 

Second, many parts of the country, especially the southeastern 

U.S., are well suited to generate current and emerging feedstocks 

in an ecologically sustainable manner, thus providing very effective 

regional solutions. For example, forestry and poultry are two of the 

biggest industries in the South that can currently supply feedstocks 

for advanced biofuels. Emerging dedicated energy crops such as 

grasses and algae also grow very well in that climate, but additional research and market development is still needed to optimize 

these feedstock supply chains. 

Third, deployment of these technologies will lead to an increase in the number of Science-Technology-Engineering (STEM) related 

jobs across the country, which cannot be offshored and will also 

lead to rural wealth creation. However, we need to do a better job 

of connecting and leveraging Federal research assets with local universities, schools, businesses, and nonprofit organizations to accelerate these innovations to market. For example, Innovate Mississippi is the original member among nine partners with the 

USDA Agricultural Research Service, among nine partners with 

ARS, with the goal to facilitate commercialization of ARS research. 

I applaud the 2014 farm bill for urging the Department of Agriculture to move forward with further development of such publicprivate partnerships to provide venture development training for 

innovative technologies. 

Fourth, advanced biofuels should be viewed in a more holistic 

manner to include viable biomass-based energy and biochemical options in gaseous, liquid, and solid forms. This requires a long-term 

comprehensive energy policy that provides clear market certainty. 

The announcement by President Obama on March 28 unveiling a 

strategy to curb methane emissions does that to a great extent; 

however, the national Biogas Roadmap scheduled for release in 

June this year will focus mainly on the dairy industry, which is 

quite small in the South compared to poultry. Millions of tons of 

poultry waste is generated in States from Maryland to Arkansas, 

and the contributions to biogas production from this very viable 

feedstock have largely been ignored. There are tremendous entrepreneurial opportunities in deploying such systems that can lead to 

11 

rural job growth and keep energy prices low for farmers, while improving soil health and water quality. 

Fifth, large volumes of advanced biofuels and energy options in 

the overall mix will help keep fuel prices in check by diversifying 

our energy supply and enhancing our national security, but market-conditioning efforts led by various Federal agencies must continue for greater adoption of such fuels. 

Our work at Innovate Mississippi can be summed up in two 

words: ‘‘coach and connect.’’ While this may sound simple, coaching 

early stage innovation-based enterprises and connecting them with 

resources like early-stage capital, technical research, and entrepreneurial service providers is challenging. The ultimate goal is to create fast-growing, profitable companies, which also yield great returns for the early-stage investors. Innovate Mississippi relies on 

various sources of State, Federal, and private sector funding to provide such services at low or no cost to the entrepreneurs. 

I am proud to say that, due to the combined efforts of many 

stakeholder organizations, Mississippi is emerging as a regional 

leader and the proving ground for commercial-scale production of 

various advanced clean energy technologies such as woody biomass 

and MSW-based cellulosic biofuels, biogas production from poultry 

waste, torrefied wood pellets, thin film solar panels, and energy efficient windows. 

In closing, I would like to make the analogy that investing in renewable energy is just like investing for your retirement. In this 

case, we have to invest to diversify our Nation’s energy portfolio, 

which is dependent on fossil fuels for nearly 93 percent of its transportation sector needs. From a timing standpoint, we cannot put off 

making these serious investments in renewable forms of energy 

until the expiration of these fossil fuels is imminent. 

Thank you very much. 

[The prepared statement of Dr. Arora can be found on page 31 

in the appendix.] 

Chairwoman STABENOW. Thank you very much. 

Ms. Young, welcome. 

STATEMENT OF NANCY N. YOUNG, VICE PRESIDENT, ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS, AIRLINES FOR AMERICA, WASHINGTON, D.C. 

Ms. YOUNG. Thank you for the opportunity to discuss the benefits that advanced alternative jet fuels can bring to the United 

States airline industry, our economy, and our Nation. My name is 

Nancy Young. I am vice president of environmental affairs of Airlines for America, representing the major passenger and cargo airlines of the United States. 

The U.S. airline industry is indispensable to our Nation and its 

economy. To place this in context, the Federal Aviation estimates 

that civil aviation supports more than 10 million jobs, $1.3 trillion 

in economic activity, and over 5 percent of the GDP. Even so, the 

steady rise of jet fuel prices and price volatility have had tremendous negative impacts not only on the airlines and their customers 

but their employees and the communities that the airlines serve. 

Fuel is our number one cost center, representing over one-third 

of operating expenses. Although U.S. airlines consumed 5 billion 

12 

fewer gallons of jet fuel in 2013 than they did in 2000, they spent 

a staggering $34 billion more. A stable domestic supply of commercially viable alternative jet fuel would provide a competitor to petroleum-based fuel, tempering jet fuel price and volatility. It would 

also help the U.S. airlines build on their strong environmental 

record. 

But the benefits of advanced aviation biofuels would not inure to 

the airline industry alone. Our armed forces would derive similar 

benefits. In addition, a vibrant alternative jet fuel industry would 

create American jobs and spur economic development in the areas 

that are most hit by the recession. 

Rural America would benefit greatly from access to new markets 

for biomass crops while industrial areas would be revitalized. Moreover, the energy security of the Nation would be improved. 

For the past several years, A4A and our members have been 

working in earnest to achieve these synergistic benefits. As a cofounding and leading member of the Commercial Aviation Alternative Fuels Initiative—CAAFI—we have significant successes to 

report. Through CAAFI we helped lead the successful effort for 

specifications certifying two alternative jet fuels, and other fuel 

conversion technologies are now up for approval. 

A4A and our members are committed to ensuring that the alternative fuels we accept will have reduced life-cycle emissions compared to today’s fuels and not compromise the food basket. Thus, 

I am pleased to report that we have developed methods and tools 

to demonstrate that these aims are met. Our vigorous pursuit of 

alternatives has sent an unmistakable signal to farmers, fuel producers, and investors: U.S. airlines are committed to making alternative jet fuels viable and will do our part. 

But we recognize we cannot do it alone. Working in public-private partnerships, we have gone beyond testing and test flights to 

commercial airline and military jet flights. Yet we still need to 

scale up supply and make it fully cost competitive. 

Central to this effort is our Farm to Fly initiative. Since 2010 we 

have worked with the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Boeing, and 

other stakeholders to align U.S. biofuels agricultural policy to support advanced aviation alternative fuels. Farm to Fly has brought 

farmers, fuel producers, and airlines together. It has spawned two 

regional initiatives to foster alternative jet fuels derived from 

homegrown biomass, and more efforts are in the works. But I note 

that this initiative could not exist without the Energy Title of the 

farm bill. Hence, we commend this Committee for its leadership in 

seeing that legislation through to passage. By assuring multi-year 

authorization and funding for critical programs, Congress will provide the stability needed for further progress. 

Our joint efforts are bearing fruit. For example, United Airlines 

has executed a purchase agreement with AltAir Fuels for 15 million gallons of advanced bio jet fuel over a 3-year period, to begin 

at the end of this year. Alaska airlines has entered an agreement 

for the future purchase of sustainable aviation biofuel from Hawaii 

BioEnergy, with deliveries slated to begin in 2018. 

Although these initial purchases are promising, we cannot be 

complacent in our efforts. To see these projects through to fruition 

and spur more, we must continue to employ all the tools we have 

13 

to further scale up supply. This is exactly what the Defense Production Act project between the USDA, Department of Energy, and 

Department of Defense is designed to do in partnership with private industry. We urge Congress to continue to support this important program. 

In sum, the aviation industry and would-be alternative jet fuel 

suppliers are on the cusp of creating a viable alternative jet fuel 

industry—a synergistic win for the airlines, the traveling and shipping public, U.S. jobs, our armed forces, our economy, and our Nation. But continued Government partnership is needed in the near 

term to get us over the cusp. With sustained support, advanced 

aviation biofuels will, quite literally, get off the ground. 

Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Young can be found on page 64 

in the appendix.] 

Chairwoman STABENOW. Well, thank you to all of you. In listening to all of you, I think from race cars to airlines and everything 

in between, biofuels are a very exciting new opportunity, a growing 

opportunity, and some would say, again, back to Henry Ford, not 

new but an opportunity now for us to create jobs and create new 

opportunities for agriculture and to get us on to cleaner types of 

fuel and energy. 

We are in a situation, though—and I would like each of you to 

respond for a moment—in that what is facing us right now is the 

EPA talking about lowering the 2014 RFS volumes. In the face of 

all of this, when we see, on the one hand, we can grow more, we 

have more opportunities that are coming on the market every day, 

assuming that we can continue to see that happening and financing and so on, given the RFS situation, and we have the consumer 

end of it, whether it is airlines or race cars or whether it is automobiles, people at the pump. Yet here we are with the EPA talking 

about the ‘‘blend wall’’ and the impact that they would argue. 

So I guess I would like each of you to respond specifically to that. 

Is there a limit to the percentage of biofuels that can be blended 

in conventional gasoline? What do we do to increase the market 

penetration? What happens if, in fact, the EPA goes ahead in terms 

of the ability to do the things that we are talking about this morning? Mr. Childress? 

Mr. CHILDRESS. I think if they do that, the consumer is the one 

that will pay. At the end of the day, all of our Americans will end 

up paying the price. If we cannot get more ethanol, we have got 

to have blend pumps at these service stations to give our consumers a choice. It would be one of the most negative things, in 

my opinion and in Growth Energy’s opinion, that if they lower the 

standards, it will be devastating to our public. It just opens the 

door for more foreign oil. 

Chairwoman STABENOW. You know, Dr. Koninckx, I am going to 

ask you to respond, but I often think what a crazy situation we are 

in where we are trying to create more competition so prices will go 

down at the pump for consumers. Yet the folks that do not want 

competition control whether or not there is the pump there to create the competition. This is kind of a crazy situation that we certainly need to figure out how to get beyond. Dr. Koninckx? 

14 

Mr. KONINCKX. Yeah, and the EPA decision or the EPA’s proposal unfortunately makes it worse and basically goes along with 

that faulty assertion. What is really a problem here is that the 

EPA has used a method, a logic to restrict or to limit the RVOs on 

the basis of the supply chain, which the incumbent controls, and 

that is more devastating than any other aspect of their proposal, 

because this really would put biofuels in a downward movement, 

and this really would slow down and stop the positive impact that 

it has had on agriculture, on energy prices, by lowering the demand for oil. Also, immediately there will be an impact on greenhouse gas emissions, which will increase. 

There is really no blend wall. I call it the ‘‘blend step.’’ The technology to go beyond E10 is there. My neighbor here has talked 

about it already. There are numerous options there, and really the 

EPA—we are surprised and disappointed about their proposal. The 

EPA there makes an error that is going to cost us. 

Chairwoman STABENOW. Mr. Coleman 

Mr. COLEMAN. Thanks for the question. You hit the nail on the 

head that the oil companies control the pumps, and so then you 

need—if you have that situation, then you are not going to have 

competition without policy. The RFS is actually designed to push 

higher renewable fuel blends into the marketplace. One of the ways 

it does that, because Jan has so articulately described it to this 

point, is using the RIN. One of the things that has happened is 

EPA has decided that what happened last year is a bad thing and 

they are dialing the program back, when, in fact, what happened 

last year was the oil industry refused to comply with the program, 

RIN prices went up, and then other independents were just getting 

in the big game and they were going to grease the skids to comply 

with the program. 

So the program was actually working as designed last year, and 

if EPA sees that and reacts to it and decides that it is going to 

make changes, that it is going to convert an obligated party into 

a non-obligated party, the investors are going to see that, and they 

are going to run away from the industry. That is really the situation that we face. 

E15, for example, is certified in 2001 and newer vehicles. That 

is three-quarters of the cars on the board. You have got diesel 

fuel—I drive a diesel car. You have diesel fuel sitting there. They 

have made the investment to put diesel there. A small percentage 

of passenger cars are diesel cars. 

So we have the infrastructure to go where we need to go. It is 

really all about the program pushing incumbents there. 

Chairwoman STABENOW. Thank you. 

Dr. Arora and then Ms. Young. I know I am running out of time 

here, but I would like to hear from each of you for a minute. 

Mr. ARORA. Thank you for the question. I think regarding the 

question of blend wall, Brazil shows that really there are no technical limits to blend walls, and you can put even up to 100 percent 

ethanol. So does NASCAR show that as well. But I think what also 

we are missing the point on is that biofuels really offer good options to have regional strategies, and we are trying to, I think, pursue a one-size-fits-all strategy for the whole country. So we should 

also be looking at ethanol, which really works beautifully in the 

15 

Midwest, as well as for other applications. We should also be looking at drop-in biofuels in the Southeast where the feedstocks are 

different so you can match—take woody biomass or poultry industry biomass and convert that over to the biofuel. So we need to look 

at it more on a regional basis as opposed to a one-size-fits-all strategy for the country. 

Chairwoman STABENOW. Thank you. 

Ms. Young? 

Ms. YOUNG. Jet fuel is not subject to the volume requirements 

of the RFS for good reason: Making jet fuel to meet the rigorous 

safety requirements we have is a higher hurdle than it is for 

ground-based fuels. But we have a win-win opportunity here. 

Under the RFS program, the very projects I was talking about that 

produced advanced jet fuel, advanced biofuel, can qualify under the 

RFS, and in those cases they can offset the obligation of the producer for purely ground-based fuel. 

So it is sort of a win-win in that it can take some of that pressure off of ground-based fuel. The more we can do with alternative 

jet fuel, the better for everybody. 

Chairwoman STABENOW. Very interesting. Thank you very much. 

My time is up. 

I will turn to Senator Cochran for questions. 

Senator COCHRAN. Madam Chair, let me join you in thanking our 

panel of witnesses for being here today and helping us understand 

some of the issues involved in this subject. 

I wonder, are any of you specifically recommending the adoption 

by Congress of changes in the existing law that would help meet 

some of the goals and targets that you think would be fair to this 

competitive environment that we are trying to help support? 

Mr. COLEMAN. Well, I guess I will go first. The answer is an emphatic no. The program is designed well at the legislative level. The 

issues that we have are entirely administrative, and we are working with EPA, and Members of Congress have been helpful in that 

regard. 

Mr. KONINCKX. Yeah, I would join exactly that. We would ask 

you to use your oversight authority to encourage EPA to implement 

the law as it was designed, and to not look at the supply chain that 

is controlled by the oil industry as an obstacle to its implementation. 

Senator COCHRAN. Ms. Young? 

Ms. YOUNG. I think from our perspective, our message is largely 

‘‘stay the course.’’ I think that is very important for fuel producers 

and investors and others right now. With due respect, some of the 

uncertainty in the programs has been difficult for the investor community and fuel producers and airlines alike who want offtake 

agreements. So we are greatly appreciative of the work you did on 

the farm bill, and we are looking forward to continued support for 

the Defense Production Act project that DOE, USDA, and the Navy 

are working on together so diligently. 

Senator COCHRAN. Dr. Arora? 

Mr. ARORA. Yes, I absolutely support the consensus with the rest 

of the panelists here and would add the fact that I think as a whole 

the industry has underestimated the proverbial value of death in 

trying to come out of the perspective of bringing these biofuels to 

16 

markets. Oftentimes the biofuels industry has been compared to 

bringing a new drug to market, which now takes $1 billion and 10 

to 15 years to come to market. In respect of that, the biofuels industry has actually done a great job of really moving these technologies to commercialization much quicker than a lot of other industries have. So we must stay the course with the RFS. 

Senator COCHRAN. Thank you. 

Thank you, Madam Chair. 

Chairwoman STABENOW. Thank you very much. 

Senator Donnelly? 

Senator DONNELLY. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman. Gosh, 

there is so much I want to talk about here. I am an all-in-America 

energy person. The more, the better, as long as it is, from our country and from North America. But I view this not only as an economic issue or an environmental issue but a national security issue 

in that every barrel of American fuel we make is one less that we 

have to get from places that might not be friendly toward us. 

You know, I know other members of the Committee were recently in Ukraine as well, but I was there, and a huge portion of 

everything that is going on there is the Russians holding the 

Ukraine hostage over natural gas. You think the very technologies 

that you are talking about today can help change the world, that 

it provides jobs, helps the environment, increases our national security, and makes us independent. And so I view this as critical. 

When we were landing in Ukraine, you looked and it looked just 

like Indiana, the farmland there, and the things that can be grown 

there. And to use your technology over there and helping them to 

become energy independent changes the world. 

Mr. Childress, I want to thank you for not only moving this technology along and promoting it, but also for the smiles you put on 

the faces of Hoosiers every week, and for also employing a Hoosier 

driver. We are very excited about that as well. He is a pretty good 

driver, too. 

Dr. Koninckx, what I wanted to ask you is this advanced cellulosic, has always been, ‘‘In 5 years, we are going to have this.’’ 

Then 5 years late, it would be, ‘‘Five years from now we are going 

to have this.’’ 

Obviously with stover we are there. How about woody pulp and 

all the other different sources? 

Mr. KONINCKX. Yeah, indeed, Senator, with corn stover we are in 

construction right now, and numerous—several other companies— 

Brooke mentioned them already, Abengoa, POET–DSM—are in the 

same place and will start up this year. As you said, this is a great 

competitive advantage for the U.S. to use. Agricultural productivity 

is phenomenal here. Our farmers are very good, and as a company 

invested in agriculture and very active in agriculture, we know this 

very well and we connect with that. 

We are in our facility in Tennessee, where we—as I alluded to, 

the facility that we use to develop data and know-how on how to 

develop additional biomasses as feedstock, we are already active. 

We work with switchgrass. We work with agricultural wastes of 

different types. So, absolutely, this will be extended. 

We picked corn stover as a starting point, a crop we know a lot 

about, a crop the U.S. is tremendously competitive in, and a crop, 

17 

corn stover itself, we do not need to convince anybody to grow. It 

is there, and we now have to harvest it. 

Senator DONNELLY. How hard is it—so you picked corn stover. 

You have basically unlocked the code on that. 

Mr. KONINCKX. Right. 

Senator DONNELLY. Is what you are learning from that going to 

help us unlock the code on woody pulp and other—— 

Mr. KONINCKX. Absolutely. This is a tweak, I would call it, in 

technology. It is an optimization of technology to another feedstock. 

It is not a redevelopment. It is really a tweak. 

Senator DONNELLY. Cost-wise, how competitive is this product 

going to be? 

Mr. KONINCKX. The product at first, when we start up these 

plants, will be more expensive than corn ethanol and more expensive than fossil fuel. But over time this will come down, and we 

continue—as we have always said, we continue to anticipate to be 

competitive with oil at about $80 a barrel. The cost for carbon that 

we pay is far lower than crude, and it is our entitlement to then 

work down the conversion cost, to bring that down. Just as the oil 

industry has been able to do over a century, we will bring this 

down much faster, and as I said, we anticipate being competitive 

over time with oil at $80 a barrel. 

Senator DONNELLY. Mr. Coleman, one of the biggest challenges 

we have is infrastructure. The EPA has told us the reason they 

have done this is the lack of infrastructure. It seems like shaky 

logic to me. But we do have infrastructure challenges. What are 

you recommendations to overcome those infrastructure challenges? 

Mr. COLEMAN. Well, the first thing is the industry itself has 

made a lot of progress since the inception of RFS2. So one of the 

things that I think is incorrect with regard to when EPA is talking 

about infrastructure is they talk about it like it is a big problem 

that has not been solved. So we have made great steps forward 

with regard to E85 and made great steps forward with regard to 

E15. There is much more interest in the marketplace at today’s gas 

prices to do some of these things. 

Senator DONNELLY. I mean, they say we cannot get—we have the 

product, it works great, we cannot get it to market. 

Mr. COLEMAN. Right. The big issue is that the oil industry is 

standing in our way, and so the mechanism that the RFS puts into 

law actually solves that problem. It actually—so the way that RINs 

work—and whenever we talk about RINs, it is a scary thing because the eyes can glass over. But the way that RINs work is the 

oil companies that do not want to do it have to buy RINs. If they 

buy a lot of RINs, the RIN prices go up, and then the oil companies 

that suddenly have an opportunity to make money on RINs jump 

in, and you flow the fuel into the marketplace, and you have market penetration. There is one critical point—and I am sure Jan can 

add to this—this RIN trading that goes on, it does not increase gas 

prices because it is an intra-trading scheme in the oil industry. 

So if you do not want to do it, you can buy RINs. But when you 

do not want to do it, it allows the folks the independence that do 

want to do it to get in the game. That is what the EPA is shortcircuiting when it decides to go backwards. 

18 

So it is not all about the number. We have heard Administrator 

McCarthy says we are going to increase the numbers, and our investors say, well, that is good, because shrinking marketplaces 

send investment the other way. But we have to get at this mechanism question. 

Senator DONNELLY. Well, I want to thank all of you for your investment in our country, and that every day you do this, please 

know you make our Nation stronger not only economically but also 

safer as well. 

Thank you. 

Chairwoman STABENOW. Thank you very much. 

Senator Hoeven? 

Senator HOEVEN. Thank you, Madam Chairman. I want to thank 

all of you for being here. Mr. Childress, I want to commend you on 

your incredible record, and thanks for being here today. As Senator 

Donnelly said, we have many NASCAR enthusiasts as well and 

enjoy watching you and your team very much. 

Let us start with you. How do we get the petroleum industry and 

the biofuels industry to work together? Look, we all want more domestic supply, and at the pump we want our consumers to have 

more choices and lower prices. So how do we get the traditional oil 

industry, the petroleum industry and the biofuels industry, how do 

we help them work together better to serve the consumer? What 

can we do? 

Mr. CHILDRESS. You know, I think it boils down to our Nation, 

the economic side of it, we have to have more choices for our consumers. Until we can convince our oil companies that it is good for 

America, I do not think we will ever get there. It is kind of like 

trying to get a big bully to do something over a young kid. You will 

never convince them. 

So I would like to see the big oil companies understand how important ethanol is. But when you talk about taking dollars out of 

someone’s pocket, it is hard to get them to work with you. 

Senator HOEVEN. Touch on for a minute the mileage issue with 

the biofuel blends and also some of the liability issues that we hear 

in terms of impacts on engines and that kind of thing. You are running 30 percent, obviously, in your cars. You talked about higher 

blends. So touch both on mileage and on the liability issues at least 

as you perceive them. 

Mr. CHILDRESS. Yeah, okay. We run E15. Sunoco E15 is what we 

run in our cars. We tested all the way up to E30, and that is where 

I wish we were at in America today, was working more closely to 

E30 to give our consumers a better choice at the pumps. 

You know, the liability side of it, a lot of that is a myth, in my 

opinion. In research that we have done, the liability, the way we 

run our engines is not there. If you talk about small engines, having a small engine, you cannot run a lawn mower or whatever this 

is. That engine, Briggs & Stratton, may cost $30. But the piece 

that maintains the correct ratio of fuel to air for ethanol fuels 

would probably costs another 30 bucks. So that is the reason they 

are not putting it in there. 

In our cars we have a sensor that goes through our ECU that 

assures the correct ratio of fuel to air so there are no problems. The 

19 

newer cars, 2001 up, will not have a liability problem because they 

were built from the factories to sustain ethanol fuels. 

You know, the other thing that we all have got to look at in the 

future is in 2025, I think it is, they are going to mandate a higher 

fuel mileage. Well, you get fuel mileage by octane. We are going to 

have to have smaller cars—I think it is 57 or 67 miles a gallon. 

We are going to have to have lighter cars. We are going to have 

to have smaller engines. The way we are going to get there, one 

of the ways to get there is ethanol, is a higher octane. It will make 

more power, it will burn cleaner, and it will help all of our greenhouse emissions. 

So that is something we have all got to look at when it comes 

to 2025, when we all have to go to higher fuel mileage. You can 

get there, but it has to be done with octane. 

Mr. HOEVEN. One thing you mentioned that I want to follow up 

on is blender pumps, and I think you talked a little bit about 

blender pumps as being important in terms of consumer choice and 

pricing. Just talk about you feel blender pumps can make an impact? 

Mr. CHILDRESS. There are several—well, one, the cost. You know, 

it is more economical if you put ethanol in your cars and blend it. 

If we have got more stations sitting out there today with blend 

pumps that will give our consumers a choice, it is going to be more 

economical. We are going to use more ethanol. I was just reading 

in here, I think if we could put ethanol in, we will save 7 billion 

gallons of foreign oil coming into this country, and that is a big 

number. But the blend pumps are already being put in a lot of stations—not near what we need, but when we can get it, it will give 

our consumer a greater choice, and it is going to mean more dollars 

in their pocket that they can go spend in other places. We are 

being held hostage by foreign oil. 

Senator HOEVEN. Again, Mr. Childress, thanks for being here. 

We enjoy following your racing team. To all of you, thanks for 

being here today. I appreciate it. 

Mr. COLEMAN. Do you mind if I add one quick point on the choice 

question? 

Chairwoman STABENOW. Sure. 

Mr. COLEMAN. Thank you. Respectfully, thank you. 

One quick thing that was not mentioned was E15, the fuel that 

is causing heartburn for AAA and small engine makers, is a choice 

fuel. It is an option at the pump. I think when a lot of consumers 

and trade associations think of ethanol, they think of it as a 10- 

percent blend, they are going to have to put it in their car if they 

use 87 octane. We are moving into a new territory here where, if 

you have a small engine, you have a lawn mower, you do not have 

to put E15 in your lawn mower. In fact, they ask you not to. It is 

banned from doing that. So—— 

Senator HOEVEN. You are talking with the use of blender pump? 

Mr. COLEMAN. Well, no, if we did—without blender pumps, if stations tomorrow decided to put E15 on the island, it is a choice fuel. 

They cannot get rid of the other fuels. So what we are facing here 

is a situation where you pull up and you have this new choice of 

E15. You can pass on it, but that ultimately is where our industry 

20 

needs to go because we should—people should have the choice to 

use more and people can have the choice to use less. 

Senator HOEVEN. What I would come back to is the question I 

started with Mr. Childress on: How do we make it easier to do 

that? How do we make it more cost-effective to do that for our petroleum retailers? I think that is a real key to get to what we want 

in terms of the consumer, more domestic supply, more choice, lower 

prices. 

Chairwoman STABENOW. Thank you very much. 

Senator Heitkamp? 

Senator HEITKAMP. Thank you, Chairman and Ranking Member, 

for holding this hearing. 

It is clear from the testimony today that we are so far advanced 

in the technology of creating these fuels that our big problem is 

marketing these fuels, is actually getting it into the market. There 

is a whole lot of kind of myths, and, Mr. Childress, I think today 

you dispelled very many of those myths. Every day when you run 

your cars, that tells the story that this is not something consumers 

should be afraid of. 

But I do reject in some ways the argument that the oil industry 

is so integrated vertically that they control every pump or every 

station. I can tell you what consumers do. If you do not have a predisposed inclination against ethanol—which I do not—I look up 

when I am driving in, and I say, ‘‘What price gets me the cheapest 

gasoline?’’ Right? You pull into that pump, and you say, ‘‘This is 

what I am going to run.’’ We know we can get fuel economy and 

fuel efficiency from ethanol. That is another myth: number one, it 

will wreck your engine and destroy your warranty. The other is 

that it is not as efficient and you will not get as high a mileage. 

We can dispel each one of those, but that is pervasive in my 

State, even in my State, which is an agricultural State. We are also 

an oil-producing State. 

My question is: What is the next generation of marketing strategies beyond Renewable Fuel Standards, beyond what we are doing 

with the RINs? What have your companies or your industry 

thought about in terms of how do we transition to providing greater incentives and responding to some of the concerns that our dealers have, our petroleum marketers have? I guess, Mr. Coleman, 

that would really fit your lane best. 

Mr. COLEMAN. Yes, thanks for the question. You know, I think 

you are seeing it. I think the NASCAR thing is very helpful. You 

are seeing our industry work more directly with the gas station retailers. Recently, over the last couple years—— 

Senator HEITKAMP. Can you provide some examples of that? Because my dealers come in, and obviously, we are pro-ethanol in 

North Dakota for the most part, but yet they talk about concerns 

about their underground tanks and whether that is going to create 

leakage and destroy their small business into the future. They talk 

about marketing and the huge investment that they would have to 

put in to accommodate those products. So how do I respond to that? 

Mr. COLEMAN. Well, so what we saw over the last year or so was 

retailers and independent marketers reacting very quickly to the 

RFS. The signal last summer was very clear: ‘‘We are going to use 

more ethanol.’’ We had Mapco, we had Zarco, we had some of these 

21 

stations making big investments in blender pumps, 400 pumps that 

would have fundamentally changed how much ethanol could get in 

the marketplace. We are talking about one business deal alleviating 17 percent of EPA’s supposed gap that we cannot do. So 

those are specific examples, and then when EPA said, well, we 

might go backwards, they all stopped. 

So what I would say to you is the single most important thing 

that we can do is make sure that the RFS continues to go forward. 

Everything flows around it from there. I would have a hard time 

answering your question the other way, to be totally honest. People 

build higher docks to deal with incoming tide. They do not build 

higher docks to deal with outgoing tide. If the tide starts to flow 

out on renewable fuels, we are not going to have people signing up 

for marketing deals. 

Senator HEITKAMP. Well, I guess my point is that as we move 

forward, I think the real challenge is not only a regulatory challenge, but it is also a public policy challenge. You know, I do not 

know what would happen if you put Renewable Fuel Standards to 

a vote today in the United States Congress. Right? You know, we 

would like to think we would maintain it and be able to present 

those arguments. But it may not be factual, and so I think it is 

really important that we start talking about what is the next generation of incentives, what is the next generation—just like you 

guys are doing advanced biofuels, what is the new advanced marketing strategy? How do we get it out there as you are working on 

equality and pricing? 

Like I said, if I know that I can offer a product at 10, 15 cents 

lower than the product across the street, I am going to put that 

product in because I am going to get that business. So it is all a 

game of money, it seems to me, and consumer choice. I totally 

agree with that. But I think that we need to think beyond Renewable Fuel Standards, is actually I guess my point, which is what 

is the next thing that we need to do to guarantee that the infrastructure gets built out so that we can offer this consumer choice, 

so that we can continue the diversity of the American fuel industry. 

I really applaud what the airline industry is doing. I think we are 

going to see some other alternative fuels, whether it is compressed 

natural gas—there are some creative things that are happening to 

diversify this industry, but we are challenged by the marketing. So 

I look forward to other ideas. 

Mr. KONINCKX. Senator, if I can comment on that, as a company 

that is investing very much in advanced biofuels, I chair the board 

of our joint venture with BP, Butamax, that is developing butanol 

and will commercialize butanol. It is a good example of the kind 

of things you ask for. 

But I have to say at the same time these kind of initiatives are 

less likely to succeed if the RFS is being questioned. If there is lack 

of stability in the regulatory environment, investors in this kind of 

difficult technology development will shy away. 

Senator HEITKAMP. You know, and I get that, but the argument 

you get on the other side is: When is this product going to stand 

on its own feet and market itself in a way that does not require 

any Government mandates, any Government programs? I just raise 

that because, I think about all the arguments that the oil industry 

22 

or all the detractors from RFS present us, and we need to have responses to those, and we need to have the next generation of marketing strategies. 

Chairwoman STABENOW. Thank you very much. 

Senator Grassley is next. 

Senator GRASSLEY. Thank you. Thank you all. I heard all of the 

testimony except for Ms. Young. I am sorry. I had to go back to Finance. 

There is a lot of debate in Congress about moving towards noncorn, non-food biofuels. Of course, I support every effort to develop 

advanced biofuels, but I think there is a misunderstanding about 

the role of corn ethanol in developing advanced biofuels. 

For instance, there are Members of Congress that have offered 

legislation to repeal the corn ethanol portion of the Renewable Fuel 

Standard. Some of the same members have also advocated on behalf of advanced or non-corn biofuels. 

So to Mr. Coleman and Dr. Koninckx, can you help me understand the relationship between first-generation and second-generation biofuels? Can we have an advanced biofuel industry if we 

eliminate the Renewable Fuel Standard for corn ethanol or traditional biofuels? Would we have an advanced biofuel industry without the corn ethanol industry? 

Mr. COLEMAN. Senator Grassley, thank you for the question. We 

have a partnership with the Renewable Fuels Association for a reason. They work on corn ethanol; we work on next-generation ethanol. The reason we have a partnership with them is because at 

the end of the day we are connected at the business sense, at the 

market sense, et cetera. I have given examples in my testimony. If 

you look at some of the first movers in cellulosic ethanol, you will 

see POET, you will see DuPont, you will see Abengoa with 500 million gallons of corn ethanol. But the list goes on and on: Quad 

County, Pacific Ethanol is moving. 

The reason they are moving so quickly is because they have an 

interest in diversifying feedstock at the plant. These are, in essence, integrated ethanol refineries. It is in their best interest to 

also use stover in addition to the corn kernel. When corn prices go 

up, they want to find other feedstocks, too. So there is a clear connection—not in all cases but in a lot of cases with regard to the 

first movers—between the first-generation ethanol guys and the 

second. 

Now, specifically with regard to Senator Feinstein’s proposal, it 

is not a good proposal for a number of reasons. First is when Congress makes a 15-year commitment and changes the rules a third 

of the way through, it does not matter whether you think it is warranted or not, the message to the investment community will be 

that Congress changes its mind. So it is clear that Senator Feinstein does not like the corn ethanol part of the RFS. The problem 

is realistically it will affect our industry. What she is proposing to 

do is already done. Ninety percent of the gallons left in the RFS 

are advanced biofuel gallons. So it is unclear to me what exactly 

the point is of the legislation. 

The last piece of this that we do not find believable is that she 

is proposing to amend the Clean Air Act in the RFS in a very poVerDate Nov 24 2008 17:29 Feb 23, 2015 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 C:\USERS\MW42035\DESKTOP\DOCS\93027.TXT MICAH
23 

litically clean way and that they can control the politics. Our investors will not believe that. 

Thank you. 

Mr. KONINCKX. Brooke gave a very complete answer, Senator. 

Thank you for your question. Absolutely, the advanced biofuels 

would be much more difficult, if possible at all, if there was not a 

corn ethanol industry as well that provides tremendous synergy 

and provides an example for further diversification of feedstock. 

Very much as Brooke, as Mr. Coleman just indicated, what we 

need is a stable regulatory environment, and if it is shown that the 

regulatory environment is changed in mid-course in these very difficult development cycles—and, trust me, I have worked on this 

myself for the last 7 years, coming out of the laboratory to commercial scale—stability in the regulatory environment is needed. Investors—and we are particularly worried about a second wave of investors. You know, we see direct foreign investment that is interested in this and is shying away when we see a lack of stability 

in the regulatory environment. So any change in the RFS will 

threaten the further growth in advanced biofuels as well. 

Senator GRASSLEY. Mr. Coleman, for the last few years we have 

heard that advanced and cellulosic biofuels are just a year or two 

away from commercialization. Since you represent one of the largest organizations representing advanced biofuel producers, are we 

at a critical juncture for commercialization? If so, what effect has 

the EPA proposal had on cellulosic facilities that will be coming online in the near future? 

Mr. COLEMAN. We are a critical point. We are just 6 years past 

the signing of RFS2, and so our industry has been in the lab for 

a long time. But we all know that the key to commercializing a fuel 

is to have a demand trajectory, and it is hard to have a demand 

trajectory when you are asking the oil companies to buy a product 

they do not want to buy. RFS2 solved that problem, and since then 

we have made very, very good progress, notwithstanding the financial markets. We have all these plants coming online. You can visit 

them. They are big metal, concrete objects. You have seen them, 

and we have seen them, and that is really exciting. 

What the EPA proposal did, first the leaked version in October 

and then in November, is it froze everything. We have had—every 

single one of my companies—there are no exceptions—have either 

picked up the phone or testified in meetings with Congress that 

what EPA has done is froze everything. What we are waiting to see 

is if the Obama administration and EPA turns around on this and 

addresses both the retraction on the numerical side and also properly reinstitutes the mechanism that would force change in the 

marketplace. If that is done, we will recover, and we will recover 

well. 

Senator GRASSLEY. Can I ask one more question? 

Chairwoman STABENOW. Sure. 

Senator GRASSLEY. Mr. Childress, I understand you have tested 

ethanol. What did your testing conclude about the use of higher 

ethanol blends such as E30? Did you find any serious issues with 

blends above E15? 

Mr. CHILDRESS. Yes. When we were testing E30, it actually 

showed better in the engines from horsepower—the octane built 

24 

more horsepower, which would go back to what I was talking about 

earlier, the 2025 mandates on fuel economy, and you get through 

octane. 

I think one of the other things that we—going back to what you 

had asked earlier, is educating our consumer. There are so many 

myths out there, again, what you said about the food. We only use 

one-third of the corn, out of the corn, to make ethanol with. The 

rest of it goes into distiller’s grain, which goes to the animals. This 

is not corn we eat. So that is a big myth that people have tried to 

let our consumers think that it is food versus fuel. It is not. We 

have got the greatest shortage today on beef that we have ever had 

in America since the 1940s, but a lot due to the drought. The same 

with the disease on some of our pork. 

So there are a lot of myths out there that a lot of people are 

using today. I know that is not in the question you asked, but I 

had to say that. Thank you, sir. 

Chairwoman STABENOW. Thank you. 

Senator GRASSLEY. Well, give me more time. 

[Laughter.] 

Chairwoman STABENOW. I did, Senator Grassley, I did. 

Senator Klobuchar? 

Senator KLOBUCHAR. Well, thank you very much, Madam Chairwoman. Thank you for holding this important hearing. 

I truly believe that the success, the story of the success of the 

Renewable Fuel Standard is only half-written. You look at the fact 

that we have reduced our dependency on foreign oil by 60 to 40 

percent. Now, that is a combination of things. We know it is. Some 

of it is the drilling going on of oil and natural gas in my neighboring State of North Dakota there. Some of it is the gas mileage 

standard increases that we have seen that have been so positive. 

Some of it is biofuels, and I sometimes think people do not understand that biofuels is now 10 percent of our fuel supply. People 

seem to dismiss it as some kind of a boutique fuel. That is not true. 

That is why I was so concerned when the EPA came out with the 

rule. I think it creates uncertainty, something that you were just 

talking about, Dr. Koninckx, that is going to be bad for the market, 

and especially when we are in a situation where oil has kept its 

nearly $40 billion in tax credits and ethanol has literally lost 

theirs, as well as any kind of incentive from the tax credit standpoint for advanced biofuels. So that really concerns me, and that 

is why I think that this renewable fuel standard is so important. 

I think I wanted to start with something specific that you had 

alluded to, Dr. Koninckx, and that is biobutanol and the blend 

wall. How do you see biobutanol—we actually have a plant in 

Luverne, Minnesota, and DuPont has signed on to an agreement to 

convert another ethanol plant in Lamberton, Minnesota, to also 

produce this fuel. How do you see it in other advanced biofuels 

working to overcome some of the blend wall problems that have 

been raised? 

Mr. KONINCKX. Well, as I mentioned earlier, Senator, I do not 

think of it as a blend wall but a blend step. It is a transition in 

the market that the RIN mechanism that Mr. Coleman spoke about 

earlier enables and facilitates. Butanol would be one and will be 

one of the mechanisms that allows for further blending of renewVerDate Nov 24 2008 17:29 Feb 23, 2015 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00028 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 C:\USERS\MW42035\DESKTOP\DOCS\93027.TXT MICAH
25 

able energy into fuels without any adjustment or change to the infrastructure. 

So with butanol, you can basically bring twice the renewable content and renewable energy to gasoline without any changes to the 

existing infrastructure. In an equivalent of E15, you could implement the entire Renewable Fuel Standard without infrastructure 

changes. 

In addition, butanol brings a number of advantages to refiners 

and really allows all refiners to make better use of the oil barrel 

in total as they make gasoline, jet fuel, and other products. 

But I would say, again, it is one of the possible ways to increase 

the renewable content, the energy content, and it is something that 

we invest a lot of effort, our best resources in, together with our 

partner BP. We look very much at the stability and the implementation of the Renewable Fuel Standard to continue that. 

Senator KLOBUCHAR. Thank you. 

Mr. Coleman, I hosted a meeting in my office with Administrator 

McCarthy and with a number of people in this room, half Democrats, half Republicans, about our concern about the changes to the 

Renewable Fuel Standard and their proposal. One of the things I 

was struck by was that the Director continues to believe that renewable fuels are cleaner and better for the environment than petroleum-based fuels. Can you talk about the improvements the renewable fuels industry has made in reducing the greenhouse gas 

intensity and water consumption and how you see advanced 

biofuels making improvements in this area? 

Mr. COLEMAN. Thank you for the question. So at a basic level, 

cellulosic biofuels are the lowest carbon fuels in the world. Some 

of our fuels are carbon neutral or better, and so when we are talking about building these plants, if carbon is something you care 

about, these are the lowest carbon fuel plants in the world, and 

they are a tremendous opportunity for fundamentally changing the 

marketplace. 

With regard to another point which I made in answering Senator 

Grassley’s question, there are synergies between conventional and 

advanced biofuels. Some of our members are bolting on technology 

to conventional plants, so that then raises the question, well, how 

much and to what degree are those plants improving? What we 

have seen over the last 10 to 15 years is an industry going in 

starkly the opposite direction of the oil industry. The oil industry 

is running out of light sweet crude and is using—has to go heavier 

and heavier and more carbon intensive. We have reduced our water 

and our energy, et cetera, in the vicinity of 30, 40, 50 percent. 

Senator KLOBUCHAR. Right. Do you see biodiesel as part of this? 

That has also been quite a success story, and we have not talked 

as much about that. But the feedstock diversification and also the 

wider number of fuels like bio jet fuels. 

Mr. COLEMAN. I do. I do, and I think over—one of the things you 

are going to see a decade from now is a lot of different companies 

being in both the gasoline and diesel fuel marketplace. We have 

companies that said they were all about ethanol, and there are 

really integrated biorefineries, and some of them now are producing jet. 

26 

Senator KLOBUCHAR. Speaking of jets, Ms. Young, we are a Delta 

hub, and I know Delta actually, to try to reduce some of this volatility, has gotten its own refinery going. But how do you look at advanced biofuels helping to reduce volatility and provide more competition in the jet fuel market? I look at this, as head of the Tourism Caucus, as also an economic issue. Foreign tourists spend an 

average of $4,000 when they visit our country. It is a huge boon 

to us, and if we have a diversification of fuel and we do not see 

these spikes, it is going to make it easier to bring in tourists because they are going to be able to afford to come in, and then they 

spend their money at the Mall of America in Bloomington, Minnesota, or—I do not know, I am trying to think where they would 

spend their money—in Des Moines, in Iowa. Senator Grassley, they 

would tour an ethanol plant in Iowa, for instance. 

Ms. YOUNG. Well, thank you for the question. With fuel as our 

airlines’ number one expenditure, we are really focused on trying 

to have a competitor to petroleum-based fuel exactly for the reason 

that you say. I think, price volatility certainly in the last several 

years has sort of eaten airlines’ lunch, so to speak. With that big 

of a cost center, not being able to predict, airlines like Delta, have 

had challenges, and our airlines lost a lot of money. 

Now we are in a period of going from a lot of loss, over $50 billion lost over 10 years, to a period of very razor-thin profits. But 

if we cannot manage the fuel price and volatility issue, those very 

razor-thin profits are going to be diminished. 

As I noted before, it is really not just good for the airlines, it is 

good for their customers, it is good for the economy, and it is good 

for really the industries that we would be supporting—the new biomass industries, the farmers, et cetera—if we can get this competitor to petroleum-based jet fuel. 

Senator KLOBUCHAR. Thank you very much. 

Chairwoman STABENOW. Thank you very much. 

As we wrap up, there is one other question I wanted to ask, and 

I know Senator Cochran had a question as well. As we conclude, 

I wanted to ask Dr. Koninckx, we are going to be later in the 

spring talking about bio-based manufacturing, which is something 

I know that you are very involved in as well with DuPont. In the 

farm bill, we made important steps by expanding the Energy Title 

to include not only biofuels, which are very, very important, but the 

ability to focus more on bio-plastics, bio-based manufacturing opportunities. We want to highlight that later this spring, but I wondered if you could just talk about the fact that biorefineries can integrate a number of different processes, at one location produce 

more than just biofuels and multiple—renewable chemicals that 

have multiple purposes or polymers that can be used, as I mentioned in bio-plastics. 

So I wondered if you might just take a moment sort of teeing up 

what we will be discussing later down the road, how the production 

of biofuels can create additional manufacturing opportunities. 

Mr. KONINCKX. Yes, certainly, and I cannot thank this Committee enough for the support that you have given through the 

farm bill for these programs. It is a great encouragement for us. 

We are already working on biochemicals. As I mentioned earlier, 

we already produce something called propanediol in Tennessee 

27 

from sugar in a biorefinery. It happens to be a corn wet mill. That 

sugar is being used to produce the propanediol, which is then used 

to make things like carpet fiber and so on. 

But the development that we see going forward is one in which 

the supply chain that is growing for biofuels will enable efficiency 

and low-cost access to renewable carbon for biochemicals in a way 

that is not possible up until now. So just like petrochemicals grew 

with the petroleum supply chain and an energy market as a supply 

chain source, we expect the same as biofuels will be enabling the 

growth of biochemicals. So this is very much critical for that. 

Chairwoman STABENOW. Thank you very much. 

Senator Cochran had a question, and then, Senator Grassley, 

since you are remaining as well, we might just let you ask one 

more question, if you would want to do that. So it is up to you. 

Senator Cochran? 

Senator COCHRAN. Madam Chairman, thank you very much. 

Dr. Arora, you mentioned in your testimony that in the Southeast there are many opportunities in terms of emerging feedstocks 

that are readily but not traditionally used for food or feed use. Can 

you elaborate on some of the barriers to development of advanced 

biofuels in the South? 

Mr. ARORA. Sure, I would be glad to do that. I think one of the 

things, as I mentioned earlier, the South, we are able to grow a lot 

of different types of feedstocks, which includes switchgrass and also 

grasses like miscanthus, one of them actually that was developed 

at Mississippi State University and is now being licensed commercially. But when we say ‘‘licensed commercially,’’ we are still talking about very small, relatively small penetration on these things. 

Tennessee, for instance, has over 6,000 acres of switchgrass 

growing, but when you compare that to conventional, traditional 

crops like corn, it is just a very small amount of acreage that is 

dedicated to these advanced biofuels and biofuels feedstock. So we 

need much greater penetration of the acreage for these feedstocks 

that can grow easily in this region. 

Additionally, as I mentioned earlier in my testimony also, the 

poultry litter is actually a tremendous potential that is generated 

in not only the South but just from Maryland all the way across 

to Arkansas, and the numbers that I have seen are we have over 

26 billion pounds of poultry manure that is generated, and we oftentimes see that as a liability for our country. Yet indeed that can 

actually lead to about over $550 million worth of biogas that is 

trapped, methane gas, actually that is trapped within the poultry 

litter. If you think of the future implications, we are talking about 

products like Bio Compressed Natural Gas (BioCNG) that could be 

produced from that and help with the RFS requirements. 

Senator COCHRAN. Thank you 

Chairwoman STABENOW. Thank you very much. 

Senator Grassley, if you would like to offer the last question, you 

are welcome. 

Senator GRASSLEY. I do not have a question, but I would have 

a couple suggestions: first of all, to thank Mr. Childress for bringing credibility to this industry through his use of the product and, 

most importantly, the outspokenness where he is willing to take a 

stand. I appreciate that very much. 

28 

I would suggest to you that you send Mr. Coleman’s testimony 

to the Wall Street Journal. 

[Laughter.] 

Chairwoman STABENOW. I will do that. In fact, we are going to 

send all the testimony over to EPA as well. 

We want to thank everyone for being here today. You can tell 

that our Committee is very committed to extending and expanding 

opportunities through biofuels as well as bio-based manufacturing. 

We are talking about jobs and growing rural communities and 

helping us to become more energy independent. We understand 

that we need policies that give us long-term certainty so that investments can be made in the future. We know this is a fight—it 

really is—about competition, and we are on the side of the consumers that want lower costs, lower competition, whether it is a 

business consumer like in the airlines or whether it is a family trying to make ends meet and stretch every dollar and pulling up to 

the pump, or somebody who is enjoying a great race on a NASCAR 

weekend. So we thank you very, very much for being here. 

Any additional questions for the record should be submitted to 

the Committee clerk 5 business days from today. That is 5:00 p.m. 

on Tuesday, April 15th. The meeting is adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 11:29 a.m., the Committee was adjourned.] 

(29) 

A P P E N D I X 

APRIL 8, 2014 

30 


93027.001
31 


93027.002
32 


93027.003
33 


93027.004
34 


93027.005
35 


93027.006
36 


93027.007
37 


93027.008
38 


93027.009
39 


93027.010
40 


93027.011
41 


93027.012
42 


93027.013
43 


93027.014
44 


93027.015
45 


93027.016
46 


93027.017
47 


93027.018
48 


93027.019
49 


93027.020
50 


93027.021
51 


93027.022
52 


93027.023
53 


93027.024
54 


93027.025
55 


93027.026
56 


93027.027
57 


93027.028
58 


93027.029
59 


93027.030
60 


93027.031
61 


93027.032
62 


93027.033
63 


93027.034
64 


93027.035
65 


93027.036
66 


93027.037
67 


93027.038
68 


93027.039
69 


93027.040
70 


93027.041
71 


93027.042
72 


93027.043
73 


93027.044
74 


93027.045
75 


93027.046
(77) 

DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD 

APRIL 8, 2014 

78 


93027.047
79 


93027.048
80 


93027.049
81 


93027.050
82 


93027.051
83 


93027.052
84 


93027.053
85 


93027.054
86 


93027.055
87 


93027.056
88 


93027.057
89 


93027.058
90 


93027.059
91 


93027.060
92 


93027.061
93 


93027.062
94 


93027.063
95 


93027.064
96 


93027.065
97 


93027.066
98 


93027.067
99 


93027.068
100 


93027.069
101 


93027.070
102 


93027.071
103 


93027.072
104 


93027.073
(105) 

QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS 

APRIL 8, 2014 

106 


93027.074
107 


93027.075
108 


93027.076
109 


93027.077
110 


93027.078
111 


93027.079
112 


93027.080
113 


93027.081
114 


93027.082
115 


93027.083
116 


93027.084
117 


93027.085
118 


93027.086
119 


93027.087
120 


93027.088
121 


93027.089
122 


93027.090
123 


93027.091
124 


93027.092
125 


93027.093
126 


93027.094