California
As California Pushes Increased Ethanol Use, Experts Sound the Alarm on Environmental Impacts – Inside Climate News
On Oct. 25, California Governor Gavin Newsom encouraged the California Air Resources Board (CARB) to accelerate its study of E15, a gasoline-ethanol blend, as a way to potentially lower the cost of gasoline in California and “save Californians as much as $2.7 billion every year —with little to no impact on the environment.”
The idea that E15 could lower gas prices in California is, itself, controversial. Even more controversial, though, is the notion that expanding the use of biofuels comes with few consequences.
Policy changes in California, especially when it comes to reducing greenhouse gas emissions or offsetting emissions through carbon credits, can have ripple effects throughout the U.S., and even around the globe; if California were a country, it would have the fifth-largest economy in the world. In the case of E15, California’s decision-making could impact land use in places like the Midwest, which produces most of the corn that goes into ethanol.
Ethanol is a renewable fuel that can be made from a variety of products. According to Silvia Secchi, a professor of geological and sustainability science at the University of Iowa, ethanol was originally sold as a “bridge fuel” that could one day primarily be made from cellulosic materials like wood shavings and other waste products.
Overwhelmingly, this has not happened. Corn still dominates ethanol production.
According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, 45 percent of all corn produced in the U.S. is used for ethanol production. The USDA admits that increases in corn acreage are “a result of expanding ethanol production” and notes that while the acreage of farms growing other feed grains, such as barley and sorghum, has declined, the number of acres of corn has risen.
Increased intensity on the land in places like Iowa, which produces more corn than any other U.S. state and, as a result, uses a significant amount of fertilizer, has caused an environmental situation so dire that advocates are calling for federal intervention.
“I really wish that every time people put ethanol in their car, they would drink Iowa well water at home,” Secchi told Inside Climate News. “California is not going to be producing that ethanol. It’s going to be importing that ethanol from places like Iowa or Nebraska or Kansas or South Dakota, and the environmental impacts of that ethanol, in terms of land use change, in terms of water quality, all the degradation that ethanol brings with it, they’re going to stay with us.”
Nitrogen-based fertilizers, commonly applied to corn, can leak into aquifers and waterways in the U.S., causing nitrate contamination in drinking water that could take decades to reverse. The potential effects of nitrate-contaminated drinking water on people range from blue baby syndrome in infants to colon cancer in adults. In Des Moines, Iowa, the worlds’ largest nitrate-removal facility may need to get bigger to keep up with rising rates of contamination.
For Danny Cullenward, senior fellow at the Kleinman Center for Energy Policy at the University of Pennsylvania, the impacts of biofuels on the land are difficult to overstate.
“Huge industrial use of nitrogen-based fertilizers, destroying water quality throughout most of the country, that’s not actually good. And those are the consequences that come from this myopic and very narrow look at this carbon accounting lens through these flawed methods,” he said. “All of that is necessary to underpin the notion of, maybe this will be good for consumers.”
Experts Inside Climate News spoke with are calling for more environmental impacts of E15—a blend of 85 percent gasoline and 15 percent ethanol—to be taken into consideration, not just the potential wins for consumers at the gas pump.
A “Bridge Fuel”
Ethanol is a highly subsidized biofuel. Over the last 40 years, U.S. taxpayers have spent tens of billions of dollars supporting the ethanol industry through tax incentives, farm bill programs and the Renewable Fuel Standard, a 2005 program which mandated that U.S. transportation fuel contain a certain volume of renewable fuel. That same year, the U.S. became the world’s largest ethanol producer. In 2006, California’s Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS) was first authorized as a way for the state, home to the most registered vehicles in the nation, to decrease its reliance on petroleum.
The program provides incentives for fuel producers to purchase “credits” from lower-carbon fuel sellers, or lower the carbon intensity of their fuel. Ethanol, a biofuel, became a way for producers to lower their carbon intensity. As Cullenward wrote in a recent paper, the LCFS “plays an important and increasingly controversial role in California’s strategy for reducing greenhouse gas emissions.”
In 2006, excitement was brewing that “innovation might be just around the corner,” Cullenward told ICN. Perhaps biofuels could be derived not from food products themselves—like corn and soybeans—but instead from waste products. Year after year, things did not change, and biofuels are still heavily subsidized.
“I think most transportation policy experts would tell you that the primary way we’re going to reduce emissions from the transportation sector for light duty vehicles is by electrifying them,” Cullenward said. “This is a really important part of the story, because the federal government has so heavily subsidized the production of ethanol, and because the California government sort of doubled down on this. There’s still a lot of financial support through policy mechanisms for crop-based ethanol production.”
Increased biofuel production has also resulted in the creation of carbon capture and storage projects at ethanol plants—the likes of which are already showing signs of inadequacy.
Soybeans, the second-most popular commodity crop in the U.S., are one of the main ingredients in biodiesel, which is used to fuel medium and heavy-duty vehicles like semi-trucks and buses. According to Cullenward, California accounts for almost all U.S. biodiesel consumption, most of which is shipped in from Singapore.
In 2023, the Science Advisory Board, a federal advisory committee to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, wrote to Administrator Michael Regan that “almost two decades after the Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) program’s creation, the efficacy of the program in reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions remains highly uncertain from a scientific perspective, and many other environmental concerns regarding the RFS have been raised.”
The Renewable Fuels Association (RFA), an industry lobby group, responded to SAB’s letter by sending one of their own to Regan. “The overwhelming preponderance of scientific analyses and empirical data clearly show that corn starch ethanol significantly reduces GHG emissions relative to the gasoline it replaces,” they wrote.
RFA funded the study Newsom referenced in his press release, which concludes that gasoline prices will go down with the introduction and adoption of E15 gasoline in California.
“The Renewable Fuels Association is a lobbying group, so they’re going to be looking to push findings that potentially benefit them,” said Aaron Smith, professor of agricultural and resource economics at the University of California, Berkeley.
Most gasoline consumers are pumping into their cars contains 10 percent ethanol. E15 would increase the ethanol composition to 15 percent. Smith says policymakers would need to “jump through a lot of hoops” to believe that adding five percent more ethanol to the gasoline blend would lead to a dramatic decrease in gasoline prices. Not to mention, he told ICN, that just because E15 is legal does not mean fuel suppliers will provide it. Incorporating more ethanol into gasoline blends can require suppliers to upgrade storage tanks and take on added costs.
In response to Newsom’s announcement, the Renewable Fuels Association applauded the governor’s efforts.
“Not only does E15 reduce greenhouse gas emissions and harmful tailpipe pollution, but it also delivers significant savings at the pump. Allowing the sale of E15 would provide economic relief to California families, while at the same time providing important environmental benefits,” RFA President and CEO Geoff Cooper wrote in a press release.
“There’s no credible evidence that I’ve seen that this is really going to affect gas prices at all,” Smith countered.
A “Win-Win” for Californians
In the October press release, Newsom called introducing E15 a “win-win” for Californians. But even if, in a perfect world, E15 brought down gas prices in the state, increased ethanol production is not necessarily a “win-win” for the climate.
The California Air Resources Board did not respond to requests for comment on the criticism before publication time.
This story is funded by readers like you.
Our nonprofit newsroom provides award-winning climate coverage free of charge and advertising. We rely on donations from readers like you to keep going. Please donate now to support our work.
Donate Now
“When you clear land to grow corn, what you’re doing is you’re losing a whole bunch of carbon that’s in the forest or the grass or whatever is on those fields before you clear it to make corn,” Smith said.
For Secchi, California’s renewed interest in E15 is a “sign they’ve lost their way.”
“The scope of their policy is not including these effects beyond the state boundaries,” she said. “Maybe even more important, these policies that are just looking at carbon are often really stupid because they don’t consider other environmental effects. So, if we’re trading carbon for water or water for carbon, that’s not a good policy. That’s not a win-win.”
On Nov. 8, in the midst of national election coverage, the California Air Resources Board amended its Low Carbon Fuel Standard, which some experts, like Cullenward, warn might even increase gas prices, though there is truly no way to tell. The amendments included an increased obligation for fossil fuel sellers to cover their deficits by purchasing credits from low-carbon fuel sellers. But rising credit prices could lead to increased gas prices, with the added layer of benefitting biofuel companies, some of which are owned by oil companies.
According to Cullenward, because of California’s convoluted carbon credit program, there is a world where E15 gasoline could be a little bit cheaper, if approved for sale in California.
“You could conceivably say, ‘I am exploring a direction that will lower costs for consumers, but it really is primarily about consuming more biofuel products,’ which is terrible for the climate, and to the extent it’s cheaper, it’s because you’re subsidizing it at the same time you’re mandating it, which is just a really weird, weird system,” Cullenward said.
About This Story
Perhaps you noticed: This story, like all the news we publish, is free to read. That’s because Inside Climate News is a 501c3 nonprofit organization. We do not charge a subscription fee, lock our news behind a paywall, or clutter our website with ads. We make our news on climate and the environment freely available to you and anyone who wants it.
That’s not all. We also share our news for free with scores of other media organizations around the country. Many of them can’t afford to do environmental journalism of their own. We’ve built bureaus from coast to coast to report local stories, collaborate with local newsrooms and co-publish articles so that this vital work is shared as widely as possible.
Two of us launched ICN in 2007. Six years later we earned a Pulitzer Prize for National Reporting, and now we run the oldest and largest dedicated climate newsroom in the nation. We tell the story in all its complexity. We hold polluters accountable. We expose environmental injustice. We debunk misinformation. We scrutinize solutions and inspire action.
Donations from readers like you fund every aspect of what we do. If you don’t already, will you support our ongoing work, our reporting on the biggest crisis facing our planet, and help us reach even more readers in more places?
Please take a moment to make a tax-deductible donation. Every one of them makes a difference.
Thank you,
Nina Elkadi
Contributor
Nina Elkadi is a freelance writer from Iowa who reports on agriculture, water, and the environment. Her work also explores the manipulation of science and how corporate negligence affects consumers and workers.
A Bay Area couple charged in the murder of a 2-year-old girl who reportedly overdosed on fentanyl earlier this year failed to appear in court last week to face the charges.
The tragic incident occurred just after 5 a.m. on Feb. 12, according to the San Francisco County District Attorney’s Office.
Officers with the San Francisco Police Department responded to an apartment in the 3800 block of 18th Street, near Mission Dolores Park, after receiving a 911 call reporting that a child was not breathing.
“Medics arrived at the location and pronounced the two-year-old child deceased,” the DA’s office said in a news release. “Medics observed signs of rigor mortis and lividity, indicating the child had been dead for several hours.”
Responding officers noted that Michelle Price, 38, the girl’s mother, was slurring her speech and had “an emotionless demeanor,” according to court documents. Investigators also observed drug paraphernalia in the apartment, including three pipes, lighters and torches, a used Narcan container, white powder ultimately identified as fentanyl, bottles of spoiled milk and stained sheets on the bed.
Price was arrested for child endangerment.
Her boyfriend, Steve Ramirez, 43, allegedly attempted to flee the apartment on a bicycle, leading police on a chase during which an officer was injured. At the time of his arrest, Ramirez was reportedly in possession of a pipe inside a bag on his bike. Two additional pipes with burnt residue were also found nearby, investigators said.
Blood samples taken from Price and Ramirez at the time of their arrests showed high levels of methamphetamine and fentanyl in their systems, according to the DA’s office.
An autopsy performed by the San Francisco Medical Examiner’s Office revealed no obvious signs of physical injury to the toddler. However, toxicology testing showed lethal levels of fentanyl, as well as naloxone, commonly known as Narcan, in the child’s bloodstream.
“The cause of death was determined to be acute fentanyl poisoning,” the release stated.
Price was initially charged with felony child endangerment, possession of fentanyl and possession of drug paraphernalia. Ramirez faced the same charges, along with an additional count of resisting, obstructing and delaying a peace officer.
Over the objections of prosecutors, both Price and Ramirez were allowed to remain out of custody ahead of their arraignments.
On April 15, San Francisco District Attorney Brooke Jenkins announced an amended complaint charging the couple with second-degree murder, marking the first time such charges have been brought in a fatal fentanyl overdose case in the county.
“There wasn’t really anywhere safe for this child to be inside of this home,” Jenkins said during a press conference announcing the charges. “This is a moment in time where people have to realize that we take these situations very seriously and where, I believe, parents who knowingly possess fentanyl, who understand its lethality and the danger it poses, allow their children to be exposed to it, this is something that can come with respect to accountability if a child dies.”
At the April 16 arraignment, where both defendants failed to appear, Price’s attorney told the court she may have experienced transportation issues. An attorney representing Ramirez said he did not know his client’s whereabouts, according to KTLA’s Bay Area sister station KRON.
While both attorneys said the couple was mourning the loss of the child and struggling with addiction, Ramirez’s lawyer accused the district attorney’s office of turning the case into a media circus, claiming the publicity caused his client to panic.
The judge subsequently issued bench warrants for both Price and Ramirez. It remains unclear whether either has since been taken into custody.
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
As the nation prepares for its 250th Independence Day celebration, a decades-long California Fourth of July fireworks tradition that has raised millions for local children’s programs is going dark this year after the California Coastal Commission rejected a final effort to keep it alive, citing environmental concerns to protect the bay.
“We’ve raised over the past 14 years $2 million for kids programs here in Long Beach,” event organizer John Morris told Fox News Digital, adding the July 3 event is fully funded by the local community.
“This community pays for everything — everything. City fees, and the city doesn’t give us a break. We pay $20,000 to the city for police and fire, which I’m fine with, because there’s 100,000 people enjoying the fireworks,” said Morris, a Long Beach resident and business owner.
Morris, who owns the Boathouse on the Bay restaurant, had planned a scaled-up fireworks display this year to mark America’s 250th Independence Day.
CALIFORNIA BEACH TOWN BANS THE USE OF BALLOONS
Long Beach residents have enjoyed the fireworks organized by John Morris for over a decade. (Scott Varley/MediaNews Group/Torrance Daily Breeze via Getty Images)
In January, Coastal Commission staff rejected the proposal, and last week commissioners unanimously upheld that decision despite an appeal backed by local, state and federal officials.
Regulators warned Morris last year that 2025 would likely be the final year for fireworks at the event, as they continue pushing organizers to switch to drone shows they say are more environmentally friendly.
The decision stands in contrast to other approvals by the commission, including a permit granted to SeaWorld allowing up to 40 nights of fireworks.
“They get 40 nights in Mission Bay. All I’m asking for is 20 minutes — it doesn’t make any sense,” Morris said.
Morris, 78, also pushed back on the environmental concerns cited by the commission, pointing to years of testing around the event.
CLIMATE EXECUTIVE WARNS CALIFORNIA ‘FUNCTIONALLY BANKRUPT,’ $1T SHORTFALL COULD SHAKE NATION
Due to the lack of fireworks, Morris has decided to cancel the July 3rd celebration.
“We’ve had 10 years of environmental studies,” Morris said. “We test the water before and after the fireworks and send a robotic camera into the bay to check for debris — there’s never been any. It’s been spotless.
“We’ve also had eight years of bird reports to make sure we’re not harming wildlife. We’ve never had an issue. We’ve never been written up one time. So what is it really about?”
Joshua Smith, a spokesman for the California Coastal Commission, told Fox News Digital that permits are determined on a case-by-case basis, citing environmental concerns to “protect the bay.”
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
Organizer John Morris said environmental studies are regularly conducted to measure the impact of the fireworks show on the bay. (Allen J. Schaben/Los Angeles Times via Getty Images)
Smith said Morris was approved for a permit to hold a drone show in lieu of fireworks. Morris told Fox News Digital such a show would cost about $200,000 — roughly four times more than traditional fireworks.
Smith confirmed that SeaWorld received a permit allowing 40 nights of fireworks. When pressed on the discrepancy, he reiterated that decisions are made individually and declined to provide further details.
Morris said the loss of the fireworks show will be felt across the community, from local businesses to families who have made the event an annual tradition.
LOS ANGELES (AP) — In the wide-open race for California governor, billionaire Tom Steyer is on a spending binge.
The hedge fund manager-turned-liberal activist is using his personal fortune to saturate TV screens and mobile phones with advertising, while his competitors accuse him of trying to use his vast wealth to buy the state’s most powerful job.
Steyer’s ads — in which he promises to bring down household costs or rails against federal immigration raids — appear inescapable at times in heavily Democratic Los Angeles, the state’s largest media market. Data compiled by advertising tracker AdImpact show Steyer has spent or booked over $115 million in ads for broadcast TV, cable and radio — nearly 30 times the amount of his nearest Democratic rival.
If he makes it through the June 2 primary election, Steyer could easily eclipse the 2010 record set by Republican Meg Whitman, who spent $178.5 million in a losing bid for governor, much of it her own money. At the time, it was the costliest campaign for statewide office in the nation’s history.
Even when ad buys from all his major competitors are combined, along with ad purchases by independent committees supporting candidates, Steyer is outspending the field by tens of millions of dollars.
“Billionaire money is flooding our state in an attempt to buy this election,” former U.S. Rep. Katie Porter, one of Steyer’s chief rivals, warned her supporters this month.
Mail-in ballots are set to go out to voters next month. Steyer is among a crowd of candidates hoping to seize a spotlight after former Democratic U.S. Rep. Eric Swalwell’s dramatic departure from the race following sexual assault allegations that he denies.
But while Steyer has ticked up in polling amid his spending splurge, he has not broken away from the field, leaving some wondering if he’s getting value for his dollars.
“If your first round of ads doesn’t move you dramatically (in the polls), the third, fourth, fifth, six, seventh and eighth rounds won’t either,” said veteran Democratic strategist Bill Carrick, who for years advised the late Democratic U.S. Sen. Dianne Feinstein. “There is something inherently holding Steyer back.”
In recent prior campaigns for governor, at this stage a leading candidate was taking control of the race. This year, voters appear to be shrugging at a contest that lacks a star candidate among seven leading Democrats and two Republicans.
“Somehow the campaign is frozen,” Carrick added.
History shows that money doesn’t always translate into votes.
Billionaire developer Rick Caruso spent over $100 million in 2022 in his bid to become Los Angeles mayor, much of it his own money, but he was handily defeated by Mayor Karen Bass, who spent a fraction of Caruso’s total. Billionaire former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg spent more than $1 billion of his own money on his 2020 presidential bid before dropping out. And Steyer’s money was unable to lift him into contention in the 2020 presidential contest, when he dropped out early in the year after a poor finish in the South Carolina primary.
Steyer has never held elected office.
In a 2019 interview with The Associated Press, Steyer was asked what he would say to people who think he’s trying to buy the presidency.
“I don’t think that’s possible,” Steyer said at the time, before adding, “I’m never going to apologize for succeeding in business. That’s America, right?”
His campaign did not respond directly when asked about similar criticism facing his run for governor.
“Tom now stands as the only Democrat with the grassroots energy, institutional backing and resources to advance to the general election,” spokesperson Kevin Liao said in a statement.
The governor’s race was recently reordered by two developments: Swalwell, a leading Democrat, abruptly withdrew from the race then resigned from Congress, following sexual assault allegations. Meanwhile, President Donald Trump endorsed conservative commentator Steve Hilton.
Still, there is no clear leader.
Polling in late March and early April by the nonpartisan Public Policy Institute of California found a cluster of candidates in close competition: Democrats Steyer and Porter, Republicans Hilton and Chad Bianco, and Swalwell. Other candidates were trailing. The polling was conducted before Swalwell withdrew.
Democrats have feared the party’s large number of candidates could lead to them getting shut out of the general election in November. That’s because California has a primary system in which only the top two vote-getters advance to the general election, regardless of party.
Leading Democrats are all claiming to have picked up support since Swalwell’s exit. Steyer nabbed one plum endorsement, when the influential California Teachers Association, which previously backed Swalwell, recommended him.
In his ads, Steyer promises to “abolish” U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, which has been staging raids across California. In another, he laments the state’s punishing cost of housing, “Everybody needs an affordable place to live,” he says.
-
Alabama4 minutes agoAlabama AHSAA softball key dates and top teams approaching the 2026 playoffs
-
Alaska10 minutes ago‘We never forgot her’: Friends, family of longtime Alaska teacher gather for 100th birthday celebration
-
Arizona16 minutes agoTrying to beat the heat: Addressing rising temperatures in Southern Arizona
-
Arkansas22 minutes ago
Arkansas Lottery Cash 3, Cash 4 winning numbers for April 19, 2026
-
California28 minutes agoCalifornia couple charged with murder in death of toddler skip court
-
Colorado34 minutes agoUPDATE: Northbound Powers reopned after major crash
-
Connecticut39 minutes agoCT Lottery Cash 5, Play3 winning numbers for April 19, 2026
-
Delaware46 minutes agoMan speeds past leading runner in photo finish at Delaware Marathon