Environmental Impacts of an Ethanol Plant in the Missouri Ozarks for 2007 NACAA AM/PIC Grand Rapids, MI July 17, 2007 by Bob Schultheis Natural Resource.

Environmental Impacts ofan Ethanol Plant in the

Missouri Ozarksfor

2007 NACAA AM/PICGrand Rapids, MI

July 17, 2007

byBob Schultheis

Natural Resource Engineering Specialist

2

Why the Rush for Ethanol?

$3 per gallon gasoline Demand for greater energy security Concern over relying on oil imports from

politically volatile regions– Those opposing ethanol are branded as

“unpatriotic” or “supporting terrorism” Growing worries about CO2 contributing to

“global warming”– Methane & nitrogen oxides (NOx) are much

bigger contributors Income for grain farmers & petroleum

companies

3

Basics of Ethanol Production

Ethanol is an alcohol made by fermenting grain and other carbohydrates

This is an old process which traditionally has been used to produce ethanol for use as a beverage

97% of U.S. ethanolis made from corn

4

Ethanol Conversion Factors

Corn – dry mill = 2.75 gallons/bu = 98.21 gal/ton(4.2 T/ac. = 150 bu./ac. = 410 gal./ac.)

Corn – wet mill = 2.65 gallons/bu = 94.64 gal/ton Grain sorghum = 2.70 gallons/bu = 96.43 gal/ton Wheat = 2.80 gallons/bu = 93.33 gal/ton Barley = 1.40 gallons/bu = 58.33 gal/ton Sugarcane = 19.50 gal/ton

(35 T/ac. = 680 gal./ac.)

Sugar beets = 24.80 gal/ton Molasses = 69.40 gal/ton Raw sugar = 135.40 gal/ton Refined sugar = 141.00 gal/ton

5

Corn Starch Ethanol HFCS

Germ

Corn Gluten MealGerm Meal

Corn Germ Meal

Gluten

Bran

Steepwater solubles

Corn Gluten Feed

Corn Oil

Wet Milling Process

6

Dry Milling Process

CornEthanolStillage

Thin Stillage

Wet Distillers Grain Condensed

Distillers Solubles

Wet Distillers Grain with Solubles

A bushel of corn will produce ~2.75 gallons of Ethanol, 17 lbs of CO2 and 17 lbs of DDGSDDGS

7

8

Environmental Considerationsof Ethanol Production 1

More acreage being put into corn– Marginal land has lower yields & generally has

higher erosion rates Sediment concern in water ways Nitrogen use for corn production

– Marginal ground doesn’t utilize fertilizer as well causing higher potential for nutrient runoff and leaching

– U.S. nitrogen sources = Russia, Trinidad & Tobago– Made from foreign oil & natural gas

9

Environmental Considerationsof Ethanol Production 2

Atrazine runoff concerns– Whether in water or attached to soil, atrazine use

for weed control has higher potential to runoff into water bodies

– If not wisely managed in targeted watersheds,it may be banned in all watersheds

Water demand– Growing the corn = 1450 gallons per 1 gal. ethanol

(600,000 gal./ac./season ÷ 150 bu./ac. ÷ 2.75 gal./bu.)

– Making ethanol = 3-5 gallons per 1 gal. ethanol Air emissions of the ethanol plants

10

Environmental Considerationsof Ethanol Production 3

High P, K and S content of DDGs as feed Ethanol cannot be transported by pipeline

– Truck fuel use & air emissions to transport it Underwriters Laboratories (UL) has not

issued safety approval for E85 pumps Is U.S. ethanol

replacing foreign oilor domestic oil?

11

Economic Considerationsof Ethanol Production

$.51/gallon federal excise tax credit– 5.1 cents/gallon for 10% blend– Government tax incentives used since 1978 to

make ethanol competitive with gasoline

$.54/gallon federal tariff on imported ethanol States may also offer incentives

– Missouri = $.20/gallon producertax credit on first 12.5 milliongallons

12

Economic Considerationsof Ethanol Use

E10 = negligible MPG loss– 3% less energy per gallon than gasoline +

2.5 points higher octane rating E85 = 15-20% MPG loss, depending on

driving habits and terrain– 27% less energy per gallon than gasoline +

13 points higher octane rating Only select vehicles can burn E85

– Flex-Fuel Vehicles or FFVs built mostly after 1999 – Corrosion-resistant stainless steel gas tanks and

Teflon-lined fuel lines

13

U.S. Gasoline Usage, 1986-06

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

1601986

1988

1990

1992

1994

1996

1998

2000

2002

2004

2006

Billion G

allons

Source: U.S. Energy Information Administration

14

Ethanol Production, 1980-06

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.01980

1982

1984

1986

1988

1990

1992

1994

1996

1998

2000

2002

2004

2006

Bill

ion G

allo

ns

Source: Renewable Fuels Association

15

Gas & Ethanol Production, 1986-06

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

1601986

1988

1990

1992

1994

1996

1998

2000

2002

2004

2006

Billion G

allons

ethanol gasoline

Source: U.S. Energy Information Administration

16

U.S. Gasoline Usage

Mandating 10% ethanol in all gasoline would require that nearly half of the U.S. corn crop be processed into ethanol

If all U.S. corn were made into ethanol, it would produce 31 billion gallons per year

To replace all U.S. gasoline would require78.6 billion bushels of corn annually

Source: FAPRI 2006

17

Webster CountyGroundwater Impact Committee

(Appointed 8/23/06 by County Commission, dissolved 11/18/06)

Bob Schultheis - Natural resource engineering specialistMarshfield, MO (Committee Chair)

Larry Alberty - Fordland area businessmanFordland, MO

Karen Asher - Seymour area farmerSeymour, MO

Joe Blaine - Soil scientistSeymour, MO

Joyce Noland - District technician, Webster County SWCDMarshfield, MO

18

Proposed Gulfstream Bioflex Energy ethanol

plant site is in James River Basin Watershed of southwest Missouri

Map source: www.dnr.mo.gov/env/wpp/watersheds/info/ws-11010002.htm

19

Equivalent Residential Demand

880 GPM water = 21,000 persons @ 60 GPD

10,000 KwH = 5,100 houses @ 1400 KwH per month

20

Webster County Demographics

7th fastest growing in population in Missouri– 35,500+ people in 2006

12th lowest (out of 114 counties) in per capita income

Pasture-based livestock production– 2nd in Missouri for dairy cows– 5th in Missouri for hay production

Almost no grain production No planning and zoning regulations Second-highest elevation in the state Residents rely entirely on drilled wells for water

– Groundwater recharged by precipitation

21

Geology of Missouri

22

Geology of SW Missouri

23

Geology ofWebsterCounty

“Top of the Ozarks”

Starting point for 5 rivers in

Missouri

1495 ft.

1525 ft.

1675 ft.

Marshfield

Rogersville

Seymour

24

Geology of Ethanol Plant Site

25

Karst Regions of the U.S.

26

Pollution Risk Areas

27

28“Losing streams” leak water underground in unpredictable directions with little or no filtering

29Sinkholes are direct conduits forsurface water to travel underground

30

Solution Channel

31

Proposed site: NE¼ of Section 15, Township 28N, Range 19W in Webster County, MO

32Soils are wet-natured due to a restrictive layer approximately two feet below the surface.

33

Gulfstream Bioflex Energy, LLC

New corporation located in Mt. Vernon, MO Privately owned; not a farmer cooperative One of partners is in the petroleum trucking

business No previous experience with ethanol Building contractor expertise is community

buildings & Branson theaters First engineering firm quit because they were

not getting paid Conflicting information from the partners

34

35

36

GBE Reasons for Site Selection

Yes– Lay of the land– Proximity to a natural gas pipeline– Easy access to railroad & four-lane highway– Can ship corn cheaper than shipping ethanol– 90% of grain arrive by rail, 10% by truck

No– Large livestock industry in southern Missouri– “Planning and zoning never came to mind”

37

GBE Ethanol Plant Estimates 1

Inputs 194 rail cars per week (data from GBE) 3,500 bushels per rail car 2.70 gallons of ethanol per bushel 4.84 gallons of water per gallon of ethanol 17.0 pounds of DDGs per bushel of grain 24 hours per day of operations 50 weeks of operation per year10,000 KwH electrical demand, if no gas used

(data from GBE)

38

GBE Ethanol Plant Estimates 2

Outputs 97,000 bushels of grain processed per day

825 tons of DDGs produced per day

261,900 GPD of ethanol produced

1,833,300 gallons of ethanol produced per week (data from GBE)

76 rail cars per week @ 24,000 gal. each

1,267,600 GPD of water required per day

880 GPM of water (data from GBE)

47 acre-inches of water per day (if irrigated)

39

Water Law in Missouri

Riparian water doctrine– Landowners are allowed to take all the water they

want as long as they leave a reasonable amount for everyone else

– “Reasonable” is determined by decision of lawsuit filed in circuit court

“Citizens for Groundwater Protection” sued to stop GBE– Circuit court ruled in favor of GBE– Case is currently being appealed

40

Possible well locations to give2000-foot separation distance

41

42

43

Static water table

High-capacity well

Existing wellsInitial cone of depression

Cone of depression

Long-term cone of depression

44

What Happens to Discharge Water?

Unclear from GBE how much water will be discharged

880 GPM = 47 acre-inches per day Soils will hold total of 3.5-5.0 inches of water Annual precipitation and evaporation are

nearly equal Rest must be discharged to drainage-ways or

irrigated How much will recycling concentrate the

discharge water? What’s in it?

45

Equivalent Conversions

880 GPM water = 21,000 persons @ 60 GPD = 3,520-unit housing development @ 6 people per house = 808 acres @ 10,000 sq.ft. per lot

10,000 KwH = 5,100 houses @ 1,400 KwH per month

825 tons DDGs/day = 550,000 head of cattle @ 3 lbs. fed per day = 3,790 acres of feedlot @ 300 sq.ft. per animal

46

Other Considerations

Noise from hammermills & dryers Light pollution Odor Air emissions

– EPA rule change on 4/12/07 increased allowable levels from 100 tons/year to 250 tons/year)

Safety from explosion and fire Traffic on Highway 60 and railroad

47Property is in two school districts

and two fire districts

48Predominant wind direction for

April-September is from SSE to NNW

49

Will the Jobs Help the County?

200-300 outside workers during construction 35-45 employees @$35,000+/year

= $2.1 million annual payroll– Rail car loading/unloading– Scale operators for weighing trucks– Laboratory personnel– Clerical workers

Will all employees live in Webster Countyand buy here?

No revenue to county government due to 11/05 property tax levy rollback for sales tax

50

Summary – Big Picture Questions

Is ethanol from corn sustainable? Does it reduce energy needs from

foreign sources? Would the site pass an environmental

impact study? Are natural resources

available to support a plantwithout damaging others?

Can the plant be convertedto cellulosic ethanol?

51

For More Information, Contact:

Click on Ethanol Plant Development link atwww.jrbp.missouristate.edu

Paul IpockWebster County Presiding Commissioner

Courthouse, 1st FloorMarshfield, MO 65706

417-859-4250 (Mondays or Tuesdays) 417-859-2223 (County Clerk)

52

Questions???

Robert A. (Bob) SchultheisNatural Resource Engineering Specialist

Webster County Extension Center800 S. Marshall St.

Marshfield, MO 65706Voice: 417-859-2044 Fax: 417-468-2086

E-mail: [email protected]: extension.missouri.edu/webster