Ethanol It was a good alternative. Then it was not, then it was. Now it is a raging debate with charges flying all about.

Now we have rising corn prices (read- consumer food prices) and an adminstration that is locking in support of ethonal while the community debates the merits. What do you think? Here are some videos on the subject to stimulate your thoughts.

What do you think of ethanol? Shout out and let us know.

With rising oil costs and environmental concerns has come increased pressure on the motor industry to develop an alternative and greener fuel to power the world’s vehicles. But would ethanol be a viable alternative to petrol (gas)?

Ethanol is largely seen as an environmentally friendly alternative to petrol. It is made from crops such as sugarcane in Brazil and soyabean in the US, and it is significantly less polluting than petrol because it doesn’t produce sulphur dioxide or lead emissions and, importantly, any carbon dioxide produced can be offset by growing more sugarcane. Cars in the UK, for instance, can currently run on about 10 per cent of ethanol in petrol, but the corrosive effect of ethanol means increasing levels above this can damage the engine if the necessary changes have not been made. Recent moves by Brazil to export biofuels to the European market on a bigger scale have increased interest in ethanol as a possible replacement for petrol. Since signing agreements with Sweden and Japan, Brazil is now interested in developing partnerships with British and European companies. In Brazil ethanol is widely available and it makes up around 40 per cent of fuel consumption and powers over 50 per cent of vehicles. Having spent the last 30 years refining the production of ethanol from sugarcane, Brazil has now become the largest producer and exporter of ethanol in the world.

The technology for creating ethanol has been around since the 1920s, but production only took off in Brazil in the 1980s when the government looked around for alternative sources in the wake of the 1970s oil crisis and rising oil prices. During the 1980s more than 75 per cent of all motor vehicles and around 90 per cent of cars were run on ethanol. But a drop in oil prices and an end to government subsidies meant that ethanol lost it’s popularity for a while. However, rising oil prices caused the popularity of ethanol to rise again a couple of years ago, and now over 50 per cent of new cars in Brazil are FFVs (Flexible Fuel Vehicles) that can be run on either pure petrol, pure ethanol or a mixture of the two.

Brazilian production of ethanol is set to rise over the next few years. In 2005 they produced 282,000 barrels of ethanol per day and the expectations are for production to rise to 442,000 barrels per day by 2010. Brazil currently exports 7,200 barrels per day to the US (who also produce their own ethanol from soyabeans). This, of course, is still a drop in the ocean compared to overall US gasoline consumption. And the question is whether or not Europe and, particularly, the UK will become a new customer for Brazil’s growing biofuels industry.

We wait to see if becomes the true green alternative and, of course, how much governments – particularly in the UK – squeeze out of us by way of tax!!

More: continued here

The Caribbean islands are often viewed by North Americans as a pleasant place to escape from the grasp of winter. What many don’t realize is that the islands have been a source of wealth for centuries-and that there is a source of wealth waiting for today’s savvy investor.

Columbus arrived in search of gold. European planters arrived in search of agricultural land. The islands truly came into their own when sugar cane developed as their primary crop. That was the real gold, as real as the gold that covers the ceilings of British aristocracy’s homes. That gold was paid for from the proceeds of sugar, rum and molasses. Was it profitable? My graduate research at Bettie’s Hope Estate in Antigua revealed 18th century documents that proved the profitability of the islands for sugar cane production. In one year alone, Bettie’s Hope delivered a profit of over one million pounds at the end of the eighteenth century. This is a fortune by any century’s standards and this was only one plantation on one island.

Sugar cane agriculture died out in the islands soon after World War II when sugar beets became a cheaper source of sugar for world markets. Many of the islands now have acres of land lying in scrub brush where sugar cane used to grow. The land is primarily owned by governments who bought out the planters when they abandoned the islands for more lucrative investments.

With all of the talk about fast depleting fossil fuels and the ever climbing global temperature, it can be difficult to catch up with the various environmental issues that are coming to the forefront of things at this point in time. Science is finding a way to make up for many of the things that are becoming issues as related to the environment, but with many of these things it is a literal race against time to find a substitute for that which we have become dependent upon. Ethanol fuel serves just that purpose.

More: continued here

The United States has passed legislation requiring a six-fold increase in the production of ethanol by the year 2022. The United States uses 19,650,000 barrels of oil a day, more than three times that of second place Japan according to Wise Geek. Because the US imports most of this oil, they are seeking to reduce their reliance on foreign sources of energy.

However, by requiring corn, in the form of ethanol, to replace foreign oil as a fuel source, they are creating several cultural clashes of note. Here are some questions that might show you how one decision can have an impact on cultures:

* How would you feel if you were a member of the crop-growing farming culture and saw prices rising for the crops you were producing?

* How would you feel if you were a cattle rancher and saw feed prices rising because of the increase demand for corn?

* How would you feel if you were part of a developing nation culture and heard this news while your nation’s citizens were dying of hunger each day?

* How would you feel if you are part of the blue-collar culture about seeing new, potential union, jobs being created at ethanol plants?

We know how the United Nations feels. According to the United Nations Special Rapporteur on the Right to Food, Jean Ziegler, turning fields capable of growing edible crops into fields growing crops for pure fuel production is a crime against demanding. He has asked for a five-year moratorium on such activity. He recommends the use of jatropha, a drought-resistant crop easily grown in developing nations. A field of jatropha is easy to establish, grows quickly, and has a lifespan of 50 years.

As you can imagine, the position of the United Nations further contributes to how cultures view the use of corn. Depending on one’s viewpoint, the United Nations is either a hero or a villain. Regardless, if we think about the use of corn and supply our thought process to other cultural events, we can begin to understand why a single issue can create a huge cultural disturbance.

More: continued here

There is a good article in Rolling Stone about [tag]ethanol[/tag].
They examine the whole ethanol policy and agribusiness connections with our politicians. I think it is a good read.

The great danger of confronting peak oil and [tag]global warming[/tag] isn’t that we will sit on our collective asses and do nothing while civilization collapses, but that we will plunge after “solutions” that will make our problems even worse. Like believing we can replace gasoline with ethanol, the much-hyped biofuel that we make from corn.

Ethanol, of course, is nothing new. American refiners will produce nearly 6 billion gallons of corn ethanol this year, mostly for use as a gasoline additive to make engines burn cleaner. But in June, the Senate all but announced that America’s future is going to be powered by [tag-tec]biofuels[/tag-tec], mandating the production of 36 billion gallons of ethanol by 2022. According to ethanol boosters, this is the beginning of a much larger revolution that could entirely replace our 21-million-barrel-a-day oil addiction. Midwest farmers will get rich, the air will be cleaner, the planet will be cooler, and, best of all, we can tell those greedy sheiks to fuck off. As the king of ethanol hype, Sen. Chuck Grassley of Iowa, put it recently, “Everything about ethanol is good, good, good.”

My feeling is that [tag-ice]ethanol[/tag-ice] is great for a small impact alternative fuel or blended fuel but we sure cannot go the way of turning our corn crops into ethanol and think we are going to save the country from the evil foreign oil.

Rolling Stone’s bottom line take:

In the end, the ethanol boom is another manifestation of America’s blind faith that technology will solve all our problems.

Pacific Ethanol, Inc. is a publicly traded company (NASDAQ: PEIX) that is engaged in the development, production and marketing of renewable fuels in the United States. The company has five ethanol plans under construction on the West Coast with expected capacity of 200 million gallons. In addition, the companys wholly owned subsidiary is one of the largest marketers of ethanol and generated in excess of $82 million in sales last year.

To many investors, the whole concept of ethanol is new. Ethanol is a fuel additive that is commonly made from corn, but can also be made from wheat, barley, potatoes and other crops. In addition, new technologies are enabling the production of ethanol from corn stalks, grain straw, paper pulp and even municipal solid waste. The starch or sugar portion of the corn is fermented and then distilled into alcohol. Sounds like a new concept, but early versions of the first automobiles ever produced ran on gasoline or ethanol!

Since January, the stock of Pacific Ethanol, Inc. (NASDAQ: PEIX) has increased almost 400% and currently trades at a market valuation in excess of $1 billion. Why all the investor excitement?

Pacific Ethanol may be in the right place and at the right time for the following reasons:

a) Ethanol is a commercially viable fuel additive that is rapidly taking the place of a fuel additive which has been banned in many states.

b) Ethanol additives results in less pollution than existing gasoline.

c) Demand for ethanol has far exceeded the industries production capacity.

d) A large number of vehicles are already capable of using gasoline mixed with an ethanol additive, usually under a 10% ethanol / 90% gasoline mixture. In addition, many manufacturers have committed sharp increases in the production of vehicles that can take much higher percentages of ethanol.

e) The production of ethanol has been highly profitable.

f) Federal and State governments are rapidly moving towards the use of alternative fuels to reduce dependence on foreign oil.

g) The company has one of the strongest management teams and a very experienced board of directors.

h) The company has attracted significant funding, including approximately $84 million in preferred stock from Cascade Investment, LLC, which is owned by Bill Gates.

Historically, companies with strong management, access to necessary investment capital and with critical mass in a rapidly growing industry – are companies to watch very closely. We believe that the Pacific Ethanol is well positioned to capitalize from the production and marketing of ethanol and should be watched closely.

Joel Arberman

Joel Arberman is the Managing Member of Stock Aware, LLC. We publish a free investment research and analysis newsletter and offer investor awareness services. Learn more at StockAware.com

The recent State of the Union address by Pres. Bush has sparked much debate about the production and use of ethanol in the US to help in the effort to reduce our foreign oil importation. It would seem thought that many analysts think there is no way we can produce the amounts of biofuel that the President calls for in his speech.

Specifically, the President’s call to increase the supply of alternative fuels to 35 billion gallons by 2017, has drawn the most reaction.

‘We heard a huge number from the President, and the first reaction is no way is that possible,’ at least under current circumstances, said Jacob Golbitz of HighQuest Partners in a recent UPI report. He added that even in a best-case scenario the U.S. would only be able to produce 16 billion gallons of biofuel per year by 2015, assuming that most of the biofuel would be corn-based ethanol.

A recent Bloomberg report said Exxon Mobil Corp. considers ethanol “irrelevant” as a solution to an addiction that forces the U.S. to import two-thirds of its oil. No “viable, meaningful business proposition” exists for Exxon in ethanol, according to Stuart McGill, Exxon’s senior vice president.

There is strong indication that the bloom is off on ethanol plant production and that even for plants that are on the board and ready to be built there will not be profitability in them and thus the market will suffer. Last year the feeling was that anyone could make money producing ethanol but no so now.

The supply and price of corn may play a prominent role in the future of U.S. ethanol production. U.S. Undersecretary of Agriculture Thomas Dorr said at a clean fuels finance conference in London reported by Bloomberg, “There’s clearly a terrific demand on corn right now. There is no question that the next couple of years are going to be painful.”

What do you think about ethanol? We want to hear from you. Drop a comment on this blog and share your opinion.

Source: Ethanol

6 Steps To make e85 Ethanol

Step One: . . . The Conversion Process

We have to break down carbohydrate sugars, such as the starch from corn. Create it into ‘Mash’. Grind or crush the feedstock (corn, soybeans, wheat, etc…). Then dilute and add an enzyme (alpha amylase) to turn the mixture into a liquid. Once liquified a second enzyme is added(glucoamylase) to convert the starch into sugar. (If the source is mainly sugar, i.e…rotten fruit, molasses, etc…, the conversion step can be skipped.

Step Two: . . . Fermentation

Add yeast and make it into a beer (wine) type solution.

Step Three: . . . Distillation

The beer (wine) type solution needs to be run through a still to extract the alcohol from the solution.

Step Four: . . . Filtration

The ethanol now needs to be filtered to get rid of excess organic volatiles.

Step Five: . . . Dehydration

The ethanol needs to be ‘dried’. After the distillation process there will be a certain amount of water in the ethanol you have just created – this can be dried running the ethanol through Zeolite a readily available product for drying ethanol.

Step Six: . . . Ethanol Into e85

Now simply convert the pure ethanol into e85 by adding 15% unleaded gasoline to your ethanol. e85 is nothing more than 85% ethanol mixed with 15% gasoline.

Frederick Musser

Frederick Musser is the owner of e85 Tips. A site dedicated to informing the world about e85 and its benefits.

For more information on e85 please visit e85Tips.com

As people become more aware of the damage that has been done to our planet and to the environment, questions have risen about what to do now to prevent further damage. E85 ethanol is the name that a fuel consisting of 85 percent ethanol and 15 percent gasoline is called by in the United States. Its less commonly found than E10 ethanol which is 10 percent ethanol and 90 percent gasoline; most likely because vehicles with specially designed engines (called flexible fuel vehicles) are needed to burn E85 ethanol while E10 can be used in most existing vehicles in the U.S.

Why should a person consider purchasing a flexible fuel vehicle and using E85 Ethanol? In addition to the benefits to the environment that are realized because a person using E85 Ethanol is decreasing the amount of toxins released into the air by using the much cleaner E85, it is a fuel that can (and is) refined in the United States which lessens the countrys dependency on foreign oil imports. E85 Ethanol is also less expensive than gasoline, usually around 30 percent less.

Ethanol E85 is made from starchy feedstock, with corn being its major ingredient. Since corn is already being grown at a tremendous rate in the Midwest, it also signals prosperity for farmers. To date, there are over 600 pump stations in the United States that supply E85 Ethanol. That may not seem like very many stations, but that is twice the number of E85 stations that were in existence two years ago. Because of the focus being given to the environment along with cleaner burning and renewable fuels, the number E85 pumps is expected to rise significantly in the next few years. Currently, the Midwest has the largest concentration of E85 pumps at about 400.

Right now, there are some states, like Florida for instance, where E85 Ethanol is not available for sale to the public. Instead, the fuel is reserved for purchase by Federal fleets. Fortunately, there is talk about adding more pumps to those states that are currently without them in the near future.

What do most people consider the biggest advantage of using E85? Its that E85 ethanol is better for our environment. Not only does it reduce tailpipe and greenhouse gas emissions, but it also burns clean because of its high oxygen content. In addition, it is also biodegradable and water-soluble. You know the smog you hate waking up to on some mornings? The fuel can also eliminate the smog by reducing the smog-forming pollutants at least by 15 percent.

Still, one may wonder what else sets Ethanol E85 apart from gasoline. Well, for one thing, the fuel itself has a reputation for offering high performance with a 100+octane rating, which rivals gasolines 87 octane rating. Those who use E85 Ethanol will attest that it gives a superb performance while also heightening horsepower.

The cost factor is also important in your decision to choose ethanol. Today, ethanol is currently being sold at prices approximately 35 percent lower than gasoline. But a persons realized savings will be a little less than 35 percent because E85 typically has a slightly lower fuel economy than regular gasoline. There is also a gas tax break/exemption on Ethanol that helps keep its price lower.

Even if you do not have a flexible fuel vehicle or have availability of E85 ethanol, seriously consider using E10 ethanol in your vehicle. E10 ethanol is widely available and is safe to use in most vehicles. And, even though it only contains 10 percent ethanol, it still releases fewer toxins into the air then regular gasoline making it a better choice for the environment. And, in order to help speed up the availability of E85 ethanol where you live, lobby your government representatives and let you know you want E85 available to you. And, the next time you go vehicle shopping, consider purchasing one of ever growing number of flexible fuel vehicles available.

Doreen Ruplinger

Dorrie Ruplinger is a featured contributor at GotEthanol . For information about E85 ethanol and the history of ethanol, visit us.

From now you don’t need to use only gasoline to run your car as there are
a lot of different alternative fuels. The choice of alternative fuel sources is
larger today than it has ever been before. Take advantage of fuel conversion
system and run your cars on ethanol (E85) fuels instead of traditional
gasoline.

Rio de Janeiro (PRWEB) November 30, 2006
– Abcesso Technology has launched for the first time outside Brazil their latest fuel conversion system for ethanol power cars. When installed it makes the normal gasoline car behave and perform as a Flex Fuel Vehicle. The system is totally automatic, there is no fuel selection switch, and the management system recognizes the ‘lambda probe’ signal and automatically adjusts to whichever fuel is being used in any proportion.



Ethanol is a clean-burning, renewable, produced by fermentation. It is a product of sugar metabolism in certain species of yeast in
the absence of oxygen. The process of culturing yeast under conditions to produce alcohol is referred to as brewing. Yeasts can grow in the presence of up to only about 14% alcohol, but the concentration of alcohol in the final product can be increased by distillation.

[tag]Ethanol[/tag] contains oxygen that provides a cleaner and more efficient burn of the fuel. When used in ethanol power cars, it reduces carbon dioxide, a major contributor to global warming. Although burning ethanol still releases carbon dioxide during production and combustion.

The use of ethanol blended fuel is very popular in the United States. One of the most popular is E85 fuel a mixture of conventional gasoline and ethanol. The result is a much cleaner burning fuel that is just as efficient as standard fuels. This mixture is optimized for a combination of clean exhaust and efficiency and will function properly in almost any non-diesel car or truck.

So, what is ethanol? [tag-tec]Ethanol[/tag-tec] is ethyl alcohol which needs to be 100% pure. Ethanol is the highest performance fuel on the market and keeps today’s high-compression engines running smoothly. Ethanol-blended fuel (such as E85) keeps your fuel system clean, cause it does not leave gummy exhausts.

And because ethanol burns cleaner, it produces fewer emissions. Today, all ethanol cars manufacturers approve the use of ethanol blended fuels and even recommend to use ethanol for its positive environmental impacts.

The use of an ethanol will allow to increase the performance of ethanol cars in general. Initial tests showed that ethanol may also extend from 20 to 80% the engine’s maintenance. The conversion of existing engines is not only feasible, but also cost effective.

Be earth friendly and play your part in pollution control by installing fuel conversion products to improve fuel economy. Who allow your fuel efficient car to run using ethanol fuel, gasoline or even mix of both — E85 fuel.

Ethanol

The Yes on 87 campaign held a rally in SF on this week to promote the alternative energy proposition onthe California ballot this month. Former President Bill Clinton spoke to the crowd about the need for this proposition to pass.

What do you believe on Prop 87? Here are some of the latest quotes on it from various sides of the issue. You read them and then tell me what you think. Alternative energy or big oil?

Prop. 87 Gets An F Grade
By Marian Bergeson

Past President California School Boards Association
For many parents, the last couple of weeks have meant the beginning of a new school year – taking kids to the bus stop, packing lunches and buying school supplies. For educators it has meant getting back to the classroom to set them up, planning lessons and meeting a new group of students.

Those of us worried about the future of our schools should be concerned about one particular ballot question – Proposition 87 – which not only will impose an oil tax, but would hurt education too. According to California’s independent Legislative Analyst, Prop. 87 would decrease state and local tax revenues available for schools and other vital services. In addition, the initiative skirts preexisting education funding requirements contained in the state Constitution, passed nearly two decades ago through Proposition 98.

Editorial: Yes on Prop. 87October 31, 2006
By Editorial Board
The Editorial Board urges readers to vote yes on Prop 87. The measure, if passed, would impose a tax on oil production in California. The revenues generated by this tax will be used to fund the development of alternative energy technologies, thus decreasing our dependence on oil, accelerating the adoption of cleaner technologies and improving the environment.

Arguments Against Prop 87 (Oil Severance Tax) Crumble Under Analysis–Even That of a Conservative Economics Professor
By Frank D. Russo

“Slicker than Oil: The Debate Over California’s Proposition 87″ appeared last week on the Applia Econ Blog; News for Econ Students. It is written by Paul Romer, a Stanford professor of economics. He is a Senior Fellow of the Hoover Institution, a fairly conservative think tank named after Herbert Hoover. All the more important for his conclusions.

His analysis of Proposition 87 shows that it will not increase gas prices (using what he calls an “introductory macroeconomics course” level analysis) and lays to rest the arguments of the oil industry. While he remains neutral with regard to 87, he does say that opponents are totally off base in the main arguments they are making.

This is a little of what he has to say:

The market for oil is global, and the price of oil is set by global supply and global demand. California produces less than 1% of all the oil produced in the world, so changes of a few percent in its output would be far too small to have a noticeable effect on global supply and demand. Taken together, all the producers in California are in the same position as a single firm in a competitive industry. …
Understandably, these producers have raised a lot of funds to support a campaign to oppose the imposition of this new tax. The tax would raise up to $4 billion before it expires, so for oil producers as a group, it makes sense to spend millions of dollars to defeat the tax. What is interesting about the campaign ads that they support is their repeated claim that the tax will raise the price of gasoline. No doubt, their campaign consultants have found that raising this irrelevant issue is the most effective way to get people to vote against this proposition

.
The article is very short and has only one graph. It is clearly worth a perusal of at least a few minutes to be able to analyze some of the policy issues in this debate.

This isn’t the only claim of the oil companies that is showing to be false. They have a record $90 million in their war chest to spend on ads that don’t hold up to economic or factual analysis. Take a look at the argument that Proposition 87 will decrease California oil production, which is dealt with in Professor Romer’s article. There is now an additional fact in the way of this argument to buttress what the good professor had to say.

Chevron basically confirmed that Prop 87 will not reduce California oil production yesterday, in announcing its $5 billion third quarter profits. Chevron’s CFO said “we could see at current prices and current production levels a penalty on Chevron in the order of $200 million.”

Implicit in this admission by Chevron CFO Steven Krowe is that Chevron expects to continue at least the current level of oil production in California after Proposition 87 passes. This is in stark contrast to the oil company ads that claim oil production will decrease in California as a result of Prop. 87.

“Today’s campaign finance filings showed how much the oil companies have spent on buying endorsements for their sham coalition. Chevron today showed how false No on 87′s economic arguments are. The No on 87 campaign was created by and is bankrolled by the oil companies to keep us dependent on the oil they sell. Their coalition and arguments are lies,” said Beth Willon, the Yes on 87 Press Secretary. “The oil company puppeteers pulling the No on 87 campaign’s strings have finally come out from behind the curtain and exposed the farce that their campaign is.”

Prop. 87: Higher Gas Prices, Imported Oil and $4 Billion Open Check

Opinion — Jaime Rojas Jr.

Would a $4 billion tax on oil produced in California be good for the people of California or bad?

That’s the question we’ll decide next month, when we vote on Proposition 87.

Proposition 87 does try to take on a serious issue, developing more alternative energy sources – and you won’t find many of us who disagree with that.

But the supporters of Proposition 87 chose a lemon of a vehicle to try and reach that goal. Proposition 87 will result in higher gas prices, increased dependence on imported oil, potential budget cuts to local services like public safety.

Education leaders say schools will suffer under Proposition 87.

“Proposition 87 is double-trouble for our schools. It will reduce state and local revenues to our schools right away, and because it bypasses the constitutional guarantee protecting school funding, it could rob education of $1.9 billion over the next ten years,” said Jose Luis Solache, vice president of the Board of Education of the Lynwood Unified School District in Los Angeles County.

Proposition 87 will mean higher gas prices, and make us more dependent on imported oil. Proposition 87 is not a tax on oil company profits or oil companies in general. It’s a tax on oil production in California.

Production Goes Down

That will mean oil production in California goes down.

And for the foreseeable future at least, to make up for that loss, we’ll have to import more oil from overseas.

It costs more to get that oil here, and if the oil costs more, the gasoline made from that oil would also cost all of us more of our hard-earned money at the pump.

Proposition 87 has no guarantee that we’ll see a dime’s worth of progress on alternative energy for our $4 billion.

All that money will be turned over to a new state agency to be run by political appointees (who will be named only after the election), and that agency will only be required to do one thing – spend that $4 billion.

» Link to this article

I personally think that if the oil industry is putting millions of dollars into defeating this measure then it must be worth voting for in the end. What do you think?

New York, New York (PRWEB via PRWeb) October 23, 2006 — “The Great Warming“, the new climate change documentary opening nationwide November 3rd in select Regal theaters, is made possible by Swiss Re, the world’s largest reinsurer, while makers of environmentally and ecologically friendly products such as Krystal Planet, Ecover and The Body Shop are lending products and manpower to the promotional and marketing mix of the film to create consumer awareness and help drive ticket sales, it was announced today by the film’s creator and producer, Stonehaven Production’s Karen Coshof.

Karen Coshof: “For the past six years, Swiss Re has sponsored Stonehaven’s climate films. What they’ve brought to the table goes way beyond funding; they’re a true partner and have provided input and expertise. In my opinion, Swiss Re is one of the exceptional global corporations with an ethical and environmentally responsible platform that isn’t just empty talk. Their leadership has paved the way for like-minded companies to get onboard what will help create the next sea-change in America.”

As a company committed to helping enterprises manage risk, Swiss Re seeks to encourage and strive for balance in economic, societal and environmental development.

Krystal Planet is a pioneering environmental company dedicated to eliminating what company founder and CEO Troy Helming calls America’s “Myopic dependence on dirty fossil fuels and foreign energy.” The company is the nation’s leading marketer and distributor of a wide variety of energy saving, efficient products. His company’s ‘Clean Power Revolution’ supports “The Freedom Plan,” an initiative the company’s founder authored, which outlines a plan to convert the U.S. to 100% clean renewable power in 10 years thus saving the nation’s economy $20 trillion by 2025.

“’The Great Warming’ is a powerful example of effective and truthful storytelling, uncluttered by politics or bias. We are proud to sponsor this film and be positioned as the “go-to” company for providing real world solutions for individuals and corporations alike to convert to clean power,” said Troy Helming, Krystal Planet founder and CEO. “Working together, we can return America’s energy policy to the people. Toward that end, our nationwide network of dealers are offering a free, no obligation home energy review to every person who goes to a theater to witness this great film.”

Ecover is a Belgian manufacturer of ecological cleaning products as alternatives to the vast array of chemical-based and caustic household cleaners. All Ecover products degrade, ensuring their safe reversion into the environment. The company has developed into the world’s largest producer of ecological cleaning products.

Ecover strives to provide an alternative solution to conventional cleaning products, using safe ingredients, with no compromise on quality or the environment. With over 25 years experience, Ecover knows inviting just one change into your home can make a great impact.

The Body Shop, a global manufacturer and retailer of naturally inspired, ethically produced beauty and cosmetics products, is committed to being an environmentally responsible retailer. With the belief that companies can help protect the environment and support sustainable development. “The quality of The Great Warming, as a film, it’s content and message of corporate and individual responsibility in helping to reverse the damage to our planet, strikes to the heart of our beliefs and we urge all Americans and citizens of the world to see this movie,” said Simon Cowell, Vice President, Marketing, The Body Shop.

In the months leading up to its national release, The Great Warming (85 minutes) has attracted an unprecedented coalition of leaders in science, religion, business, environmental activism and education. These various groups have bridged historic gaps to join in support of the film, because “they believe in an individual and collective moral responsibility to reverse the growing threats to the environment and human health and well-being,” Coshof said. To that end, the nationwide The Great Warming Call To Action has been signed by leaders from every sector mentioned above.

More than a science lecture or a red alert, The Great Warming is aimed at bringing average citizens up to speed on the issues that are and will continue to affect them. Its overall emphasis offers hope through real-world solutions that, if implemented, can make a difference now and into the future. The film’s effectiveness is already proven, as grassroots screenings in recent weeks have mobilized members of hundreds of churches, schools, town halls and community organizations across the county.

Good books about this issue:

Omaha, Neb. (October 10, 2006) – Consumers can enjoy the ride now, but tumbling gas prices must not slow the movement to a domestic renewable energy policy. In July, the Commerce Department reported that America’s foreign oil bill climbed nearly five percent, to a record total of nearly one billion dollars a day.

“Ethanol is playing a key role in America’s energy future,” said Tom Slunecka, executive director of the Ethanol Promotion and Information Council (EPIC). “Each day, its availability to the consumer is increasing, providing benefits both to the economy and the environment.”

A national conference, Advancing Renewable Energy: An American Rural Renaissance, will bring together key stakeholders in biofuels, wind and solar energy to St. Louis, Mo. from October 10-12, 2006.

In his State of the Union address, President Bush outlined a goal of replacing U.S. oil imports from the Middle East by more than 75 percent by 2025. Oil from the Middle East accounts for approximately 17 percent of U.S. oil imports.

In the last 12 months, ethanol production has increased 50 percent in the U.S. “I believe that by 2010, ethanol can account for up to 15 percent of gasoline usage in this country,” said Gary Pestorious, a farmer and board member of several ethanol plants. “By accomplishing this goal, we will have drastically reduced the need for oil imports from the Middle East and other areas of the world.”

Ethanol production uses field corn, most of which is fed to livestock, not humans. Only the starch portion of the corn kernel is used to produce ethanol. The vitamins, minerals, proteins and fiber are converted to other products including sweeteners, corn oil and high-value livestock feed.

About EPIC:
The Ethanol Promotion and Information Council is an alliance of ethanol producers and industry leaders who have come together to spread the word about the benefits of ethanol through information and promotional programs. EPIC is a nonprofit organization and is overseen by a nine-member board of directors. Visit www.drivingethanol.org for more information about EPIC.