## Detailed Report: 2008 National Dry Mill Corn Ethanol Survey

Prepared by:
Steffen Mueller, PhD University of Illinois at Chicago Energy Resources Center

muellers@uic.edu

May 4, 2010

### ii Table of Contents

1) Introduction ................................................................................................................ .... 1 2) Survey Sample Frame..................................................................................................... 2 3) Survey Instrument........................................................................................................... 2 4) Survey Variables............................................................................................................ . 3 5) Survey Response Characteristics.................................................................................... 3
6) Results ..................................................................................................................... ....... 6 6.1) Energy Use .............................................................................................................. 6 6.2) Process and Energy Technologies ........................................................................... 6
6.3) Product Yields ......................................................................................................... 7
6.3.1) Ethanol Yield.................................................................................................... 7
6.3.2) Co-Product Yield and Moisture........................................................................ 7 6.4) Logistics................................................................................................................. .. 9 6.4.1) Corn Shipments to the Plants............................................................................ 9 6.4.2) Ethanol Shipments from the Plants ................................................................ 10
6.5) Water Use .............................................................................................................. 10 Appendix A: Advance Letter and E-Vites........................................................................ 12 Appendix B: Survey Instrument ....................................................................................... 16

List of Tables

Table 1: Natural Gas and Electricity Use ........................................................................... 6 Table 2: Process and Energy Technologies ........................................................................ 7

Table 3: Ethanol Yield........................................................................................................ 7 Table 4: Co-product moisture content ................................................................................ 7

Table 5: Cumulative Co-Products....................................................................................... 8 Table 6: Co-Product Yields per Gallon .............................................................................. 8

Table 7: Co-Product Diversification................................................................................... 9 Table 8: Corn Supply Radius............................................................................................ 10

Table 9: Ethanol Plant Water Use..................................................................................... 10 Table 10: Improvements to Fresh Water Usage ............................................................... 11

List of Figures

Figure 1: Survey Instrument Screen Shot ........................................................................... 3 Figure 2: Plant Vintage ....................................................................................................... 4 Figure 3: Plant Geography.................................................................................................. 5 Figure 4: Co-Product Variation .......................................................................................... 9 Figure 5: Transportation Mode by Plant........................................................................... 10

### iii 

## Executive Summary

The Energy Resources Center at the Universi ty of Illinois at Chicago has conducted a survey of corn ethanol technol ogies, ethanol and co-product yiel ds, energy use, water use, and logistics. The survey focuses on dry mill technologies; recent industry data on wet mill plants is available from a survey c onducted by the Renewable Fuels Association in

2007.

The survey was administered by the Surv ey Research Laboratory located at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. The survey responses represent 66% of the installed dry mill ethanol cap acity during the year 2008.

The last comprehensive survey of energy cons umption at corn ethano l plants dates back to 2001. The 2001 survey was conducted by BBI International and it was commissioned by the Office of Energy Policy and New Uses , US Department of Agriculture. The 2001 survey finds that, on average, dry mill plants use 36,000 Btu per gallon and 1.09 kWh per gallon of ethanol and produce 2.64 gallons of ethanol per bushel. We find that ethanol produced in 2008 requires 28% less thermal en ergy per gallon and 32.1% less electricity per gallon but produces 5.3% more ethanol per bushel.

On average, a dry-mill corn ethanol plant in 2008

• utilizes 25,859 Btu/gallon (LHV, anhydr ous ethanol) of thermal energy and 0.74 kWh of electricity per anhydrous gallon of ethanol,

• produces 2.78 gallons of a nhydrous ethanol per bushel,

• co-produces at once 5.3 lbs of DDGS and 2.15 lbs of WDG as well as 0.006 gallons of corn oil,

• uses 2.72 gallons of water per anhydr ous gallon of ethanol produced and discharges 0.46 gallons of water per anhydrous gallon of ethanol,

• sources corn for ethanol production within a 47.1 mile radius from the plant,

• is considering further co-pr oduct diversification and inst allation of efficient water use technologies.

## 1) Introduction

The recently enacted California Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS) and the Federal Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) require th at the greenhouse gas emissions from corn

ethanol have to be assessed on a full life cycle basis, which includes emissions from energy consumed at the ethanol plants. E ffective greenhouse gas regulations require sound data on the industry’s current performa nce, which can be established by means of surveys, engineering models, or case studies.

By the end of 2008, a total of 86% of corn ethanol was commercially produced using the dry mill process. Dry mills have traditionally produced two co-products: distillers dried grain with solubles (DDGS), and wet distille rs grains with solubles (WDGS). WDGS is high in moisture and therefore requires less dryi ng energy but it is sold more locally since it has a shorter shelf life and higher transpor tation costs. Both products enter the animal feed market. Literature suggests that over the last three years severa l plants have started to produce a third co-product and separate corn oil for sale for use in biodiesel production. 1,2



### The last comprehensive survey of energy cons umption at corn ethano l plants dates back to 2001. The 2001 survey was conducted by BBI International and it was commissioned by the Office of Energy Policy and New Uses, US Department of Agriculture. The survey results are published in Shapour i (2002) in conjunction with an analysis of the life cycle greenhouse gas emissions of corn ethanol production. 3 

### The 2001 survey included 17 dry and wet mill plants. Since the 2001 survey ther e has been a rapid expansion of the dry mill corn ethanol market (see graph of plan t population in Figure 2). As of December 2008, there were 11.1 billion gallons of inst alled ethanol dry mill capacity and 9.27 billion gallons of operating dry mill capacity in the US. 4 

### The present study provides updated industry data in order to inform the emerging regulations.

The Energy Resources Center (ERC) at the University of Illinois at Chicago has conducted a comprehensive dry mill etha nol industry survey. The survey was administered by the Survey Research Laboratory (SRL) located at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. SRL created a we b-based survey instrument, issued secure survey links to each respondent, and collected the data. The survey was conducted with broad industry support, including the renewable fuels associations from various states
(Illinois, Iowa, Nebraska), the Minnesota De partment of Agricult ure, corn growers associations (from Nebraska, Illinois, Iowa ), as well as both RFA and Growth Energy.

We would like to thank these or ganizations for their support.

1 Nilles D (2008) Corn Oil, Diversity on In dustry’s Mind. Ethanol Producer Magazine

2 Rendleman M, Shapouri H (2007) New Technologies in Ethanol Production. United States Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Economic Report 842

3 Shapouri H, Duffield J, Wang M (2002) The Energy Balance of Corn Ethanol: An Update. United States Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Economic Report 813

4 Data provided by the Renewable Fuels Association

### 2 

## 2) Survey Sample Frame

The survey sample frame was compiled fr om public sources in cluding the Renewable

Fuels Association’s databa se of biorefineries ( http://www.ethanolrfa.org/industry/locations/ 

### ) with additional input from representatives fr om Monsanto and the Illinois Corn Growers Association. The survey sample frame cons isted of the entire population of 150 dry mill ethanol plants operating duri ng the 2008 calendar year (plu s plants starting up in the
winter of 2008/2009).

The selection of the interviewees followed Campbell’s “technique of the informant,” meaning that particular effort was placed on selecting a contact person at each plant who was well informed about the subject matter. 5 

### As a result, common titles of the interviewees were: Plant Manager, General Manager, Chief Executive Officer, and Chief Technology Officer. Each interviewee received an advance letter, followed by an e-vite

and a reminder e-vite with the link to the actu al web-based survey. The letters and e-vites are reproduced in Appendix A.



## 3) Survey Instrument

The survey instrument was developed by UIC/ Steffen Mueller with primary input from RFA, ethanol plant operators, and Mi chael Wang/May Wu at Argonne National Laboratory. The survey instrument was i ssued to the respondents via a web-based template. The Survey Research Laboratory (SRL) located at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign created the web-based survey template, issued secure survey links to each respondent, and collected the data. Skipping programming of the survey instrument allowed for the survey instrument to adjust follow-up questions to submitted answers. A pre-test of the survey was pe rformed with a total of three facilities and three additional experts from the ethanol industry. The survey included a response faci litator in the form of an Amazon.com Gift Code totaling $50 for each respondent. Appendix B includes a
copy of the survey script. A sample screen sh ot of the web-based survey instrument is

shown below.

5 Campbell, Donald T. “The informant in Quantitative Research”; American Journal of Sociology, 60, pp.
339-342, 1955.

### 3 Figure 1: Survey Instrument Screen Shot



## 4) Survey Variables

The survey instrument was designed to explore a total of six different types of variables pertaining to: a) energy tec hnologies (types of thermal f eedstocks, energy equipment) installed at the ethanol plan ts; b) energy consumption, both thermal and electricity; c) processing technologies (corn oil sepa ration, cold cook, carbon dioxide extraction, etc.) employed by plants; d) process yields (for ethanol and co-products) achieved by plants; e) logistics (corn, etha nol transport), and f) water us e and adopted water efficiency

measures.



## 5) Survey Respon se Characteristics

In total, 90 dry mill plants of 150 operating plants during 2008 responded to the survey. This represents 6.1 billion gallons of 9.27 bill ion gallons of operat ing capacity or a 66% response rate. The first test determined whet her the plant vintage of responses matched the plant vintage of the population. As poi nted out in the in troduction, the energy efficiency of ethanol plants has been consis tently increasing over time and plant vintage could introduce significant bias.

The histogram of plant start- ups in Figure 2 confirms that the plant vintage of the responses closely matches the plant vintage of the population indicati ng that plant vintage does not introduce a sign ificant survey bias.

The second test determined whether the geogr aphic location of the responses matched the geographic location of the population. Plant lo cation may influence di fferent technologies and logistics of the production process (corn is shipped different distances etc.). The

### 4 maps in Figure 3 confirm that the plant locations of the responses match the plant location of the population indi cating that geography does not introduce a significant bias.



## 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40

19 8

1 1 9

8

5 19 9

1 199
4 1 9

9

6 199
8 2 0

0

0 2002 2 0

0

4 20 0

6 2 0

0

8



## YearNumber of Ethanol Plants Population Survey Responses

Figure 2: Plant Vintage

### 5 Figure 3: Plant Geography

### 6 

## 6) Results

6.1) Energy Use

Natural gas-fired energy systems are the predominant thermal energy source for dry mill ethanol plants. The average natural gas consum ption of natural gas- fired ethanol plants and their corresponding electricity use is de tailed in Table 1. Numbers shown are weighted by plant capacity as well as simple average by plant count.

Three reporting plants use coal . One of the coal plants em ploys a fluidized bed boiler, which consumes 33,157 Btu/gal (HHV, a nhydrous) of coal and 0.90 kWh/gal of electricity. The second coal plant utilizes waste steam from a nearby coal-fired power plant reducing allocated thermal energy and electricity to below 10,000 Btu/gal and 0.65 kWh/gal respectively. The third coal plant reported coal use but not detailed Btu/gal data. Two plants use biomass (gasification, syrup combustion), and one additional plant uses landfill gas. With six non-natural gas a nd 73 natural gas plants reporting, natural gas

constitutes 92% of thermal energy supply by plant count.

In 2008, the University of Illinois at Ch icago conducted a detailed case study on the energy consumption of the Illinois River En ergy Center, a standard 100 mgpy natural gas fired ethanol plant. That plant uses 2 5,289 Btu/gal (LHV, anhydrous) and 0.71 kWh/gal. The survey results match closely to the IRE data.

Table 1: Natural Gas and Electricity Use

All Thermal

Feedstock Plants Natural Gas Plants Only (Btu/gal) Anhydrous (Btu/gal) Anhydrous Weighted Average (HHV) 28,692 29,118
Average (HHV) 28,590 29,177

STD (HHV) 4,471 3,416
Weighted Average (LHV) 25,859 26,206

N 78 73

Weighted Average 0.74 0.73
Average 0.76 0.75

STD 0.24 0.23

N 75 70



### 6.2) Process and Energy Technologies

Table 2 below lists process and energy technologies employed by dry mill ethanol plants. One of the most significant new process te chnologies adopted by ethanol plants is backend corn oil separation, which accounts for about one third of a ll surveyed plants. A total of 22% of all plan ts utilize combined heat and power technologies.

### 7 Table 2: Process and Energy Technologies

Corn

Fractionation Backend Corn Oil Separation Carbon Dioxide

Extraction Cold Cook

Process Combined Heat

and Power

Count 2 23 8 27 17

% 2.7 30.7 10.5 37.0 22.4

N 73 75 76 73 76



### 6.3) Product Yields

6.3.1) Ethanol Yield

The ethanol yield reported by pl ants is summarized in Table 3. The ratio of anhydrous to

denatured ethanol reveals that denaturant accounted for 2.5% of denatured ethanol by volume. As usual, numbers shown are weight ed by plant capacity as well as simple average by plant count.

Table 3: Ethanol Yield

Ethanol

Yield: Anhydrous Ethanol

Yield:

Denatured

Weighted gallons/bushel 2.78 2.85
Avg 2.80 2.87

STD 0.12 0.13

N 77 78



### 6.3.2) Co-Product Yield and Moisture

a) Moisture The moisture content reported by ethanol plan ts is listed in Table 4. The standard

deviations indicate some vari ability in reported moisture. Numbers shown are weighted by plant capacity as well as simple average by plant count.

Table 4: Co-produc t moisture content

Moisture

DDGS Moisture

WDG

Weighted % 10.8 57.2 Avg 10.8 57.2

STD 0.9 8.3

N 40 29

### 8 b) Co-Product Yield Traditionally, dry mill corn ethanol plants produced two co-products: DDGS and WDG. Over the last years, a third co-product, co rn oil, was added and, as shown above, about one third of all plants now also produce corn oil.

The yields of the three key products that ar e co-produced with ethanol during dry mill operations are further analyzed. The producti on of these co-products is interrelated: producing one product reduces the output of the two other ones. Therefore, for the purpose of yield analysis, the data set cannot contain missing values for any product. We

were able to isolate a total of 53 plants for this analysis . The cumulative products from these plants are shown in Table 5. On averag e each gallon of ethanol results in the coproduction of 5.3 lbs of DDGS and 2.15 lbs of WD G as well as 0.006 gallons of corn oil.

However, co-products from individual plants vary widely. These vari ations are illustrated in Figure 4, where individual co-product data for 10 plants is shown. For example, Plant 10 produces 5.73 lbs/gal of DDGS and an additional 0.57 lbs/ga l of WDG, but it does not separate corn oil, whereas Plant 7 produ ces 6.14 lbs/gal of DDGS, 0.42 lbs/gal of WDG, and separates 0.025 gal/gal of corn oil.

Table 5: Cumulative Co-Products

DDGS
(tons) WDG
(tons) Corn Oil (gallons) Ethanol Produced (gallons)

8,530,970 3,463,315 19,005,589 3,221,417,924

N 53 53 53 53

Table 6: Co-Product Yields per Gallon



### DDGS (lbs/gal) WDG (lbs/gal) Corn Oil (gal/gal)
Weighted Average 5.30 2.15 0.006

N 53 53 53

### 9 Co-Product Production

0.00 2.00 4.00 6.00 8.00 10.00 12.00 14.00 16.00

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Plant#lbs/gal

0.000 0.005 0.010 0.015 0.020 0.025 0.030gal/gal corn oil

DDGS (lbs/gal)

WDG (lbs/gal)

Corn Oil (gal/gal)

Figure 4: Co-Product Variation



### Several plants are reporting co-products other than DDGS, WDG, or corn oil, a trend

which seems to indicate further diversificat ion within the industry. Table 7 summarizes additional co-products and the number of reporting plants.

Table 7: Co-Product Diversification



### Co-Product # of Plants
Syrup 3

Modified Distillers Grains 3

Carbon Dioxide 1 Bran, Germ Syrup 1 Syrup, Carbon Dioxide 1

Condensed Distiller Solubles 2

Solubles 1

6.4) Logistics

6.4.1) Corn Shipm ents to the Plants

The survey asked the following question: “The vast majority (90%) of corn is grown within what radius of your plant (please estimate or provi de best guess)?” The responses

are summarized in Table 8. The statistics we re skewed by two ethanol plants located in the southwest which reported large corn transportation distan ces (in excess of 1000 miles). Excluding these two plants results in much lower transportation distances and standard deviations for the reporting plants. In fact, the average corn draw circle of 47.1 miles indicates that plants source their corn in very close proximity to their plants.

### 10 Table 8: Corn Supply Radius
The vast majority of corn is grown within what radius of plant? Excluding two plants located in

the southwest
Weighted Miles 91.5 47.1
Avg 75.6 45.7

STD 189.7 42.4

N 78 76



### 6.4.2) Ethanol Shipme nts from the Plants

The ethanol distribution mode from the plants was assessed. The transportation modes of 42 valid responses weighted by ethanol volum e are as follows: 25% of ethanol is distributed by truck, 3% by ship/barge, a nd 72% by rail/tankcar . The transportation modes vary significantly by plan t as indicated in Figure 5.

Ethanol Distribution

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39 41

Plant #Percent Transportation Share by Volume

Tankcar

Barge

Truck

Figure 5: Transportation Mode by Plant



### 6.5) Water Use

The water use and discharge reported by etha nol plants is summari zed in Table 9. The survey also asked the following open ended que stion: “Has your plant made any recent improvements to reduce fresh water usage? ” Table 10 shows the verbatim responses, which appear to indicate a trend toward s overall water use/disc harge optimization by ethanol plants.

Table 9: Ethanol Plant Water Use
Fresh Water Water Discharge

Weighted gal/gal (anhydrous) 2.72 0.46
Avg 2.69 0.43

STD 0.88 0.63

N 48 55

### 11 Table 10: Improvements to Fresh Water Usage
Responses to Open Ended Question

Installed 2 [reverse osmosis] RO systems to re cycle water from our waste stream. Installed a fin fan system on our cooling tower. Coming up with a plan to
Complete recycle of water and went zero liquid discharge during 2008
Cooling tower makeup water pretreatment. Evaporator modifications

Improved water treatment capacity to reduce coo ling tower water usage by increasing cycles

Increased cycles of concentration of water in the system.
Installed/modified heat exchangers to capture more heat to be used in the process and reduced the heat loading to the cooling tower Optimization of RO operations C ontinued optimization of fermentation
Proprietary, cut 25% of required water to CO2 scrubber while remaining below required

emissions limits Recover more heat from stack, reducing boiler make up and less fresh water to the sky.
Single prop from 3 prop system NH3 Addition to Ferm vs. Urea Use some RO water makeup

to the CT Discontinue use of Met hanator No longer use hydroheater Use a recycle stream as inlet to the front end water needs

Use storm water for make up water in the process

Water is recycled back to the slurry instead of disposing it. About 10%
Water reuse/ cleaning program.

We added a fourth reverse osmosis machine to help clean more gallons of water.

We cycled up our cooling tower.
We have installed additional piping and valves fo r the recycling of used steam and condensate.
Zero discharge Plant with RO concentrating to reduce water to be discharged
One plant uses zero discharge

### 12 Appendix A: Advance Letter and E-Vites

Advance Letter

Dear [%%First Name%%], Dear Ethanol Plant Operator:

Recent regulations, including the California Low Car bon Fuel Standard and the Renewable Fuels Standard II, use models to compare the energy and environmental fo otprint of ethanol against gasoline. In order to assure correct representation of t he ethanol industry during these modeli ng procedures, the University of Illinois at Chicago Energy Resources Center (UIC-E RC), with broad industry support, is conducting a survey of ethanol plant energy consumption.

The energy use numbers from the ethanol plants will be aggregated with the intent to update the GREET Model that is managed by Argonne National Laborator y. The energy use numbers from the ethanol industry have not been updated in the GREET Model since 2004. The GREET Model is a full life cycle fuel analysis model used to determine the greenhouse gas emissions of different transportation fuels. This model is used by both the California Air Resources Board and the USEPA to determine the direct greenhouse gas emissions of ethanol compared to gasoline for the Low Carbon Fuel Standard and the RFS II respectively.

Argonne has committed to the Illinois Corn Growers Asso ciation, the Illinois Rene wable Fuels Association and the University of Illinois-Chicago that they wi ll update the GREET Model with the new numbers if a statistically representative nu mber of ethanol plants complete this su rvey completely and accurately. This updated data is critical if we want USEPA and CARB to correctly represent reductions in the Global Warming Impact of corn ethanol compared to gasoline.

None of the collected data will be used for commerc ial/competitive purposes. All collected data will be aggregated to provide a snapshot of t he average industry; the ethanol plant’s individual information will never be released. Participation in this assessment is strictly voluntary. However, a large sample of responses is crucial to the success of this project.

In the next few weeks, we will email ethanol plant op erators a link to a web-based assessment form, which will primarily assess basic capacity, co-product, and energy (gas, coal, electric use) information. The requested information should be readily available and take no longer than 30 minutes to complete. In appreciation for your time, you will receive a $50 Amaz on.com® Gift Card* for completing the questionnaire.

Your Gift Card will arrive via email within two we eks from the University of Illinois at Chicago.

All submitted information will be collected and aggregated by the University of Illinois at Chicago Survey Research Laboratory ( www.srl.uic.edu ). Steffen Mueller, Principal Econom ist at UIC-ERC will be available to provide guidance and answer any questions throughout the survey process. He can be reached at 312-355-

3982 or muellers@uic.edu

.

Thank you very much for participating in this important project.

Sincerely,

Steffen Mueller, PhD Principal Economist, University of Illinois at Chicago Energy Resources Center

*Amazon.com is not a sponsor of this research. Amazon, Amazon.com, and the Amazon.com logo are trademarks of Amazon.com, Inc. o r its affiliates. Amazon.com Gift Cards ("GCs") may be used only to purchase eligib le goods on Amazon.com or its affiliated website Endless.com. GCs cannot be redeemed for purchases of gift certificates or cards, or for items from some third party sellers. GCs cannot be reloaded, resold, transferre d for value, redeemed for cash, or applied to any other account. For complete terms and conditions, see http://www.amazon.com/gc-legal. GCs are issued and © 2009 by ACI Gift Cards, Inc., a Washington company.

### 13 Initial e-vite Subject: Ethanol Plant Energy Survey

From name: Steffen Mueller, Ph.D.
From email: lisakw@srl.uic.edu

Dear [%%First Name%%],

Greetings from the Energy Resource Center at the University of Illinois at Chicago!

Recent regulations, including the California Low Carbon Fuel Standard and the Renewable Fuels Standard II, use models to compare the energy and environmental footprint of ethanol against gasoline. In order to assure correct represent ation of the ethanol industry during these modeling procedures, the University of Illinois at Chica go Energy Resources Center (UIC-ERC), with broad industry support, is conducting a survey of ethanol plant energy consumption.

The energy use numbers from the ethanol plants will be aggregated with the intent to update the GREET Model that is managed by Argonne National Laboratory. The energy use numbers from the ethanol industry have not been updated in t he GREET Model since 2004. Argonne has

committed to the Illinois Corn Gr owers Association, the Illinois Renewable Fuels Association, and the University of Illinois-Chicag o that they will update the GREET Model with the new numbers if a statistically representative number of ethanol plants complete this survey completely and accurately. This updated data is critical if we want USEPA and CARB to correctly represent reductions in the Global Warming Impact of corn ethanol compared to gasoline in both the RFS II

and LCFS.

None of the collected data will be used for comme rcial/competitive purposes. All collected data will be aggregated to provide a snapshot of the average industry; the ethanol plant’s individual

information will never be released. Pa rticipation in this assessment is strictly voluntary. However, a large sample of responses is crucial to the succ ess of this project. In appreciation for your time, you will receive a $50 Amazon.com® Gift Card for completing the questionnaire. Your Gift Card

will arrive via email within two weeks from the University of Illinois at Chicago.

Please click here to access the survey: [%%Secure Survey Link%%] . The requested information should be readily available and take no longer than 30 minutes to complete.

If you have any questions about this questionnaire , please contact Steffen Mueller at 312-355- 3982, muellers@uic.edu . For questions about the web survey administration or problems with the link, please contact Lisa Ke lly-Wilson at lisakw@srl.uic.edu.

Thank you very much for participating in this important project.

Sincerely,

Steffen Mueller, PhD Principal Economist University of Illinois at Chicago Energy Resources Center

*Amazon.com is not a sponsor of this research. Amazon, Amazon.com, and the Amazon.com logo are trademarks of Amazon.com, Inc. o r its affiliates. Amazon.com Gift Cards ("GCs") may be used only to purchase eligible goods on Amazon.com or its affiliated website Endless.com. GCs cannot be redeemed for purchases of gift certificates or cards, or for items from some third party sellers. GCs cannot be reloaded, resold, transferre d for value, redeemed for cash, or applied to any other account. For complete terms and conditions, see http://www.amazon.com/gc-legal. GCs are issued and © 2009 by ACI Gift Cards, Inc., a Washington company.

### 14 Reminder e-vite

Subject: Reminder to Participate in the Ethanol Plant Energy Survey

From name: Steffen Mueller, Ph.D.

From email: lisakw@srl.uic.edu

Dear [%%First Name%%],

Greetings from the Energy Resource Center at the University of Illinois at Chicago!

We recently invited you to parti cipate in an survey of the ethano l industry. To date, we have not received your response, so I am writi ng again to once again request your participation.

Recent regulations including the California Low Carbon Fuel Standard and the Renewable Fuels Standard use models to compare the ener gy and environmental footprint of ethanol against gasoline. In order to assure correct representation of the ethanol industry during these modeling proc edures, the University of Illinois at Chicago Energy Resources Center (UIC-ERC), with broad industry support, is conducting a survey of ethanol plant energy consumption.

None of the collected data will be used for commerc ial or competitive purposes. All collected data will be aggregated to provide a snapshot of the average industry; the ethanol plant’s

individual information will never be released.

Participation in this assessment is strictly voluntary and can be cancelled at any time. However, a large sample of responses is cruc ial to the success of this project. Your responses will be kept confidential by the UIC Energy Resource Center.

Please click here to access the survey: [%%Secure Survey Link%%] . The requested information should be readily available and take no longer than 30 minutes to complete. In appreciation for your time, you will receive a $50 Amazon.com® Gift Card for completing the questionnaire. Your Gift Card will arrive via ema il within two weeks from the University of Illinois at Chicago.

If you have any questions about this questionnai re, please contact St effen Mueller at 312- 355-3982, muellers@uic.edu . For questions about the web survey administration or problems with the link, pleas e contact Lisa Kelly-Wilson at lisakw@srl.uic.edu.

Thank you very much for participat ing in this important project.

Sincerely,

Steffen Mueller, PhD Principal Economist University of Illinois at Chicago Energy Resources Center

*Amazon.com is not a sponsor of this research. Amazon, Amazon.com, and the Amazon.com logo are trademarks of Amazon.com, Inc. o r its affiliates. Amazon.com Gift Cards ("GCs") may be used only to purchase eligible goods on Amazon.com or its affiliated website Endless.com. GCs cannot be redeemed for purchases of gift certificates or cards, or for items from some third party sellers. GCs cannot be reloaded, resold, transferre d for value, redeemed for cash, or applied to any other account. For complete terms and conditions, see http://www.amazon.com/gc-legal. GCs are issued and © 2009 by ACI Gift Cards, Inc., a Washington company.

### 15 Informed Consent

Welcome to the survey!

The University of Illinois at Chicago Energy Re sources Center is conducting a survey with approximately 160 ethanol plants. The purpose of the survey is to collect information on ethanol plant energy use, ethanol and co-product volumes, and shipping characteristics.

Compensation: There is no compensation for participating in this study. We value your input and hope that you can devote about 30 minutes of your time to answering the questionnaire.

Participation in this survey is completely voluntary . You are free to stop anytime or skip any items you do not like.

This survey is anonymous : The information you provide will only be reported as group

data.

What are the risks & benefits? There are no known risks associated with participating in this study. Your participation will benefit your industry and assure that policy makers (including those involved with the California Low Carbon Fuel Standard and the Renewable Fuels Standard) use correct information dur ing modeling procedures that compare the energy and environmental footprint of ethanol against gasoline. Aggregated results of the survey will be posted on the UIC-Ener gy Resources Center website.

Who is administering the survey? The Survey Research Laboratory (SRL) of UIC is administering this survey. SRL will not release any personal, identifying information.

If you have any questions about this survey please contact Steffen Mueller at 312-355- 3982 or by email at muellers@uic.edu. For questions about the web survey administration you can contact Dr. Sowmya Anand at (217) 333 2219, sowmya@srl.uic.edu . For concerns about the study or questions about your rights as a research participant, please call the UIC Office for the Protection of Research Subjects (OPRS) at 312-996-1711 (local) or 1-866- 789-6215 (toll-free), uicirb@uic.edu

. In appreciation for your time , you will receive a $50 Amazon.com® Gift Card for completing the questionnaire. Your Gift Card will arrive via email within two weeks from the University of Illinois at Chicago.

Thank you for your participation in this study!!

___________________________________________________________________ Click the *print* button on the browser if you would like to print this document for your records.

If you have read and understood this document and voluntarily consent to participate, please click on *next page* below to begin the survey.

*Amazon.com is not a sponsor of this research. Amazon, Amazon.com, and the Amazon.com logo are trademarks of Amazon.com, Inc. o r its affiliates. Amazon.com Gift Cards ("GCs") may be used only to purchase eligible goods on Amazon.com or its affiliated website Endless.com. GCs cannot be redeemed for purchases of gift certificates or cards, or for items from some third party sellers. GCs cannot be reloaded, resold, transferre d for value, redeemed for cash, or applied to any other account. For complete terms and conditions, see http://www.amazon.com/gc-legal. GCs are issued and © 2009 by ACI Gift Cards, Inc., a Washington company.

### 16 Appendix B: Survey Instrument

1) In what zip code is your plant located?

_________ Zip Code

2) Is your ethanol plant a dry mill or a wet mill?

Dry Mill

Wet Mill

Other (SPECIFY ________________)

3) When did your ethanol plant start

‐ up? (dd/mm/yy)

4) What is the plant's nameplate capacity for anhydrous ethanol production?

(million gallons per year)

5) How much anhydrous ethanol did the plant produce in 2008? You may want to use EIA

‐ 819.

(million gallons per year)

6) Which of the following energy and process technologies does your plant have installed?
(CHECK ALL THAT APPLY)

6a) Energy Technologies
Natural gas boiler
Natural gas direct-fired dryer

Super heated Steam Dryer (SSD)

Steam dryer
Electricity steam turbine
Electricity combustion turbine

Biomass Boiler

Biomass Gasifier
Anaerobic Digester generating methane for in-plant fuel use

Coal Boiler

Wind turbines
High efficiency motors (NEMA Premium Efficiency)
Other energy technologies (please specify)

6b) Process Technologies

Corn Fractionation Unit

Backend Corn Oil Extraction Unit

Carbon Dioxide Extraction Unit

Cold Cook Process

### 17 Other process technologies (please specify)

7) What is the total volume of corn your plant received for processing in 2008?

__________ bushels of corn

8) The vast majority (90%) of corn is grown within what radius of your plant (please estimate or provide best guess)?

_________ MILES

9) What is your plant's average yield per year of the following ethanol products?

___________ anhydrous gallons per bushel

___________ denatured gallons per bushel

10) To how many states does your plant distribute ethanol?

___________ state(s)

11) In the following table, please indicate the 3 primary states your plant distributes ethanol to,

the amount distributed, and the mode of transport. If your plant distributes ethanol to more

than 3 states, please report on the 3 top recipients. If your plant distributes to fewer than 3
plants, leave the columns blank.

RECIPIENT 1 (CITY/STATE)

QUANTITY DISTRIBUTED (IN GALLONS)

MODE OF TRANSPORT

TRUCK
BARGE/SHIP

TANKCAR

RECIPIENT 2 (CITY/STATE)

QUANTITY DISTRIBUTED (IN GALLONS)

MODE OF TRANSPORT

TRUCK
BARGE/SHIP

TANKCAR

RECIPIENT 3 (CITY/STATE)

QUANTITY DISTRIBUTED (IN GALLONS)

MODE OF TRANSPORT

TRUCK
BARGE/SHIP

TANKCAR

### 18 12) What co

‐ products does your plant distribute? (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY)

DDGS

WDG

Corn Oil

Other (SPECIFY)

FOR EACH CO

‐ PRODUCT CHECKED, THE RESPONDENT WILL BE PRESENTED WITH THE

FOLLOWING FOLLOW

‐ UP QUESTIONS

**IF DGGS:**

Who are the primary recipients of DGGS co

‐ product?

RECIPIENT 1 (CITY/STATE)

QUANTITY DISTRIBUTED (IN TONS)

% MOISTURE

MODE OF TRANSPORT

TRUCK

BARGE/SHIP

TANKCAR

RECIPIENT 2 (CITY/STATE)

QUANTITY DISTRIBUTED (IN TONS)

% MOISTURE

MODE OF TRANSPORT

TRUCK

BARGE/SHIP

TANKCAR

RECIPIENT 3 (CITY/STATE)

QUANTITY DISTRIBUTED (IN TONS)

% MOISTURE

MODE OF TRANSPORT

TRUCK

BARGE/SHIP

TANKCAR

### 19 IF WDG:

IF CORN OIL: RECIPIENT 1 (CITY/STATE)

QUANTITY DISTRIBUTED (IN TONS)

% MOISTURE

MODE OF TRANSPORT

TRUCK

BARGE/SHIP

TANKCAR

RECIPIENT 2 (CITY/STATE)

QUANTITY DISTRIBUTED (IN TONS)

% MOISTURE

MODE OF TRANSPORT

TRUCK

BARGE/SHIP

TANKCAR

RECIPIENT 3 (CITY/STATE)

QUANTITY DISTRIBUTED (IN TONS)

% MOISTURE

MODE OF TRANSPORT

TRUCK

BARGE/SHIP

TANKCAR

RECIPIENT 1 (CITY/STATE)

QUANTITY DISTRIBUTED (IN TONS)

% MOISTURE

MODE OF TRANSPORT

TRUCK

BARGE/SHIP

TANKCAR

RECIPIENT 2 (CITY/STATE)

QUANTITY DISTRIBUTED (IN TONS)

% MOISTURE

MODE OF TRANSPORT

TRUCK

BARGE/SHIP

TANKCAR

RECIPIENT 3 (CITY/STATE)

QUANTITY DISTRIBUTED (IN TONS)

% MOISTURE

MODE OF TRANSPORT

TRUCK

BARGE/SHIP TANKCAR

### 20 IF OTHER (SPECIFY)

The final set of questions relates to your plant’s energy use for calendar year 2008.

13) Does your plant Use Natural Gas for Process Energy?

If no, skip to 14)

If yes, is it possible to use your 2008 natural gas bills to total your plant’s natural gas needs
(preferred method)?

If yes, skip to 13)a

If no, skip to 13)b

13a) are your natural gas bills stated in therms or BTU?

IF therms

How many therms of natural gas were purchased for plant production in 2008?

__________ therms

IF BTU

How many BTU of natural gas were purchased for plant production in 2008?

__________ BTU

13b) Please report your 2008 natural purchases in BTU of Higher Heating Value

14) How many BTUs of coal were purchased for plant production in 2008? ________BTU RECIPIENT 1 (CITY/STATE)

QUANTITY DISTRIBUTED (IN TONS)

% MOISTURE

MODE OF TRANSPORT

TRUCK

BARGE/SHIP

TANKCAR

RECIPIENT 2 (CITY/STATE)

QUANTITY DISTRIBUTED (IN TONS)

% MOISTURE

MODE OF TRANSPORT

TRUCK

BARGE/SHIP

TANKCAR

RECIPIENT 3 (CITY/STATE)

QUANTITY DISTRIBUTED (IN TONS)

% MOISTURE

MODE OF TRANSPORT

TRUCK

BARGE/SHIP

TANKCAR

### 21 15) How many BTUs of Biomass were purchased for plant production in 2008?_________BTU

16) Did you purchase any other energy feedstocks in 2008 (please specify) ________BTU

17) Who is your plant’s electricity provider?

18) How many kilowatt hours for plant production were purchased for plant production in

2008?

19) What is your plant’s source of fresh water?

City

Onsite well

Other (SPECIFY)

20) How many gallons of fresh water per anhydrous gallon were used in 2008?

21) How many gallons of water per anhydrous gallon were discharged in 2008?

22a) Has your plant made any recent improvements to reduce fresh water usage?

Yes

No –SKIP TO Q21

22b) Please explain your recent improvements to reduce fresh water usage.

23) In the event we have questions about the data you have provided, may we contact you for

clarification?

YES

NO –SKIP TO END/THANK YOU

24) Thank you. Please provide your name and phone number or e

‐ mail address at which we can

contact you.

NAME

PHONE #

E

‐ MAIL ADDRESS

END/THANK YOU: Thank you for taking the time to complete this questionnaire. Within the next
couple of weeks, you will receive an e

‐ mail with your Amazon.com Gift Card claim code.