Category Archives: Science

Chart of the day: Debunking Chris Somerville


As we noted in the yesterday’s post on agrofuels, UC Berkeley biomillionaire Chris Somerville, who heads the BP-funded Energy Biosciences Institute on the Cal campus, sold the project to campus colleagues and the public on the premise that crops grown for fuel would be raised on what he called marginal land east of the Mississippi.

We also noted that the EBI was concentrating on miscanthus, and that a company founded by Somerville controls the world’s leading miscanthus seed bank and is partnering with Monsanto to exploit it. [Somerville himself has divested himself of his interest].

Imagine our surprise, then, on discovering this nifty little map from a U.S. Geological Survey report [PDF] by Bruce K. Wylie and Yingxin Gu published in October and titled “Mapping Grasslands Suitable for Cellulosic Biofuels in the Greater Platte River Basin, United States”:

Mapping Grasslands Suitable for Cellulosic Biofuels in the Great

Now note this excerpt from the report, including the specific reference to the production of miscanthus fuel crops west of the Mississippi:

Biofuels are an important component in the development of alternative energy supplies, which is needed to achieve national energy independence and security in the United States. The most common biofuel product today in the United States is corn-based ethanol; however, its development is limited because of concerns about global food shortages, livestock and food price increases, and water demand increases for irrigation and ethanol production. Corn-based ethanol also potentially contributes to soil erosion, and pesticides and fertilizers affect water quality. Studies indicate that future potential production of cellulosic ethanol is likely to be much greater than grain- or starch-based ethanol. As a result, economics and policy incentives could, in the near future, encourage expansion of cellulosic biofuels production from grasses, forest woody biomass, and agricultural and municipal wastes. If production expands, cultivation of cellulosic feedstock crops, such as switchgrass (Panicum virgatum L.) and miscanthus (Miscanthus species), is expected to increase dramatically.

The main objective of this study is to identify grasslands in the Great Plains that are potentially suitable for cellulosic feedstock (such as switchgrass) production. Producing ethanol from noncropland holdings (such as grassland) will minimize the effects of biofuel developments on global food supplies. Our pilot study area is the Greater Platte River Basin, which includes a broad range of plant productivity from semiarid grasslands in the west to the fertile corn belt in the east. The Greater Platte River Basin was the subject of related U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) integrated research projects (Thormodsgard, 2009).

Agrofuel roundup I: Scams, schemes, dreams


It’s been a while since we’ve covered the agrofuel scene, that wondrous playground of billionaires, Al Gore, and UC Berkeley millionaire patent-mongering profs.

There’s a whole lot to report, but we’ll start with one of the sweetest scams ever, in which a clever Canadian figured out how to make millions off Uncle Sugar simply by shipping trains full of agrodiesel south across the border, then bringing them right back to Canada without ever unloading a drop.

Then we’ll look at the latest news from BP and the university it owns right here in Berkeley.

In a second part we’ll give you a brief update on one of Berkeley’s agrofuel startups that isn’t and the fate of another partnership spearheaded by the same prof who launched the startup.

Canadian newsies investigate

The Canadian scam, which appears to have been perfectly legal, was first reported 3 December by John Nicol and Dave Seglins, a pair of intrepid journalists for the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation.

In their first story, the reporters cited reports that the tasnkers made their down-and-back trips between 15 and 28 June 2010, earning CN Rail a potential $23.6 million [Canadian] in charges.

From their report:

“In 25 years, I’d never done anything like it,” one railway worker told CBC News on the condition he not be named for fear he might be fired. “The clerk told me it was some kind of money grab. We just did what we were told.”

>snip<

According to internal CN records, Train 503 shipped the biodiesel to Port Huron, Mich., from Sarnia, Ont.; Train 504 brought them back. The number of cars on the train would remain mostly the same, but cars were added and removed, between 68 and 89 cars at a time. As soon as the paperwork and car shuffling was completed, the trains made the return trip.

“This unit train will move at least once daily to Port Huron starting on Tuesday, June 18,” said an email written by Teresa Edwards, CN’s manager of transportation for Port Huron/Sarnia.

It will “clear customs and return to Sarnia. If we can get in more flips back and forth we will attempt to do so. Each move per car across the border is revenue generated for Sarnia/Port Huron.

“It will be the same cars flipping back and forth and the product will stay on the car.”

Damned fishy, right?

Why the hell would a company send a total of 1,984 tank cars full of fuel into the U.S., then bring them back without ever unloading them?

The reporters were back with a second story on the 20th, and it’s just as sordid as you might imagine.

They note:

It turns out the shipments were part of a deal by a Toronto-based company, which made several million dollars importing and exporting the fuel to exploit a loophole in a U.S. green energy program.

>snip<

Bioversel Trading hired CN Rail to import tanker loads of biodiesel to the U.S. to generate RINs, which are valuable in the U.S. because of a “greening” policy regulating the petroleum industry. The EPA’s “Renewable Fuel Standard” mandate that oil companies bring a certain amount of renewable fuel to market, quotas they can achieve through blending biofuel with fossil fuel or by purchasing RINs as offsets.

Because RINs can be generated through import, the 12 trainloads that crossed into Michigan would have contained enough biodiesel to create close to 12 million RINs. In the summer of 2010, biodiesel RINs were selling for 50 cents each, but the price soon fluctuated to more than $1 per credit.

Once “imported” to a company capable of generating RINs, ownership of the biodiesel was transferred to Bioversel’s American partner company, Verdeo, and then exported back to Canada. RINs must be “retired” once the fuel is exported from the U.S., but Bioversel says Verdeo retired ethanol RINs, worth pennies, instead of the more valuable biodiesel RINs. Bioversel claims this was all perfectly legal.

However, one of the companies Bioversel approached to be the ‘importer of record’—Northern Biodiesel Inc. of Ontario, N.Y. — discovered that the same fuel was going back and forth across the border and the same gallons were being used to repeatedly generate new RINs under their company’s name. The company called the EPA and also sent a letter that would become an open letter to the biodiesel industry, accusing Bioversel of “trying to perpetrate a fraud against NBI and the Renewable Fuel Standard program.”

And what was the result? Were the whistleblowers rewarded for their virtuous reporting of their inadvertent involvement in a potential ripoff of American taxpayers?

Yeah, right.

The CBC reports:

Northern Biodiesel insisted the RINs issued were not valid because it had never received any bills of lading or chemical analysis reports from Verdeo, and thus Northern Biodiesel never reported/certified them with the EPA. However, millions of these RINs were sold in its name.

As a result, Northern Biodiesel RINs became tainted within the industry and [company owner Bob] Bechtold said that put him out of business.

“That was about the dumbest thing we ever did,” said Bechtold about the letter and coming forward to the EPA. “We thought we were saving the industry, doing good to protect the industry, but it ended up being the kiss of death for us, because we are no longer able to participate in the field.”

Why are we not surprised?

BP turning sour on cellulosic?

One of the most prominent names in Berkeley campus politics has been BP, once known as the Anglo Iranian Oil Company.

The oil giant’s $500 million Energy Biosciences Institute [EBI] effort to create next generation fuels at th Helios lab at UC Berkeley was the largest corporate funding ever on an American college campus, and the subject of some intense faculty politics after the school’s administration accepted the cash without the requisite consultation with the academic senate [which eventually voted an ex post facto approval].

The research, conducted in a purpose-built taxpayer-funded lab complex in downtown Berkeley, with the corporation occupying most of the space for its own proprietary research and the rest of the complex protected from prying eyes by campus security.

While the research has been going on for the past five years, one thing that hasn’t happened is the development of the technology for production of cost-effective internal combustion fuels from plant cellulose, the widely truumpeted goal of most of the research.

Chris Somerville, the multimillionaire bioentrepreneur who heads the Energy Biosciences Institute [EBI], admitted as much in an interview published earlier this month on the EBI website:

[I]t is probably premature to build a biorefinery for production of lignocellulosic fuels. Academic work in the field has not yet converged to an optimal process. As I said, we think that such an optimized process will be continuous. When we get to a situation where academic studies have converged on the most efficient process and predict economic feasibility without subsidies, then it will be appropriate to start building biorefineries. Some companies appear to have started building lignocellulosic fuel biorefineries because they have adequate confidence in their own technologies, they want to capture possible business advantages of being early movers, and (because of) pressure from the government to get on with it in order to preserve the subsidies that are currently available for advanced biofuels. I cannot evaluate the merit of these possible motivations.  However, based on technical progress in the field, I remain very optimistic that we will eventually have a very large industry based on lignocellulose feedstocks.

Somerville has a habit of omitting inconvenient truths, as we learned early on when covering the birth of the EBI for the late Berkeley Daily Planet.

Back when he was selling campus colleagues and the community on the BP grant, he repeatedly claimed that the crops used for the new miracle fuels would be grown only on marginal land east of the Mississippi.

Chris Somerville

Chris Somerville

That was at best a gross distortion. First, the “marginal lands” were those which had been taken out of production under the federal Conservation Reserve Program, which was created to end farming on lands susceptible to catastrophic erosion. Lobbyists for Big Agra and Big Oil managed to get a law passed that removed the protection if the land is used for growing fuel crops — thus gutting a program created to head off a return of the Dust Bowl years of the 1930s.

The land also provides critical habitat for threatened and endangered wildlife Continue reading

Headline of the day: Gee, who’d a-thunk it?


From Medical Daily:

No, Teen Marijuana Use Doesn’t Cause Brain Damage, But Alcohol Does

A new study has found that while marijuana had no effect on the health of teenagers’ brain tissue, alcohol did

Headline of the day: Deviant dairy dalliance?


From that erstwhile bastion of strait-laced propriety, the Smithsonian:

The Fungus in Your Cheese Is Having Weird Sex

Chart of the day: The Hubbert Curve still rules


From Tad Patzek, chair of the Petroleum and Geosystems Engineering Department at The University of Texas at Austin, and gathered from this post at his always enlightening blog, Lifeitself:

The caption:

Historic production of crude oil in the U.S. is resolved into several Hubbert curves.  The tallest one is the original Hubbert curve published in 1956.  The smaller curves starting from 1960 were generated by producing shallow, deep and ultra-deep Gulf of Mexico, Alaska (mostly Prudhoe Bay), and then everything else that was not in the original curve: large waterflood projects, thermal and carbon dioxide enhanced oil recovery (EOR) projects, horizontal wells, hydrofractured wells, etc.  The broad curve peaking in 2002 was introduced in late 2002, and the model represented fairly well the U.S. crude oil production until 2010.  The last small green curve on the right was introduced last month to describe the Bakken and Eagle Ford shales, as well as the increased production of crude oil from the Permian Basin near Midland, TX.  The right-most black curve depicts a hypothetical production of 7 billion barrels of oil from the Arctic Natural Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) in Alaska.  So the last point on the blue step-line represents 5.7 MMbopd produced in the U.S. in 2011. This rate is predicted by EIA to grow to over 6 MMbopd in 2012.

Quote of the day: Self-mythologizing scientists


From Philip Ball, a British science writer with a doctorate in physics, writing in Aeon:

[S]cience has never given up on the Whiggish view of history that historians have long since abandoned: a triumphant voyage out of the dark ages of ignorance and superstition into the light of reason. In this view, all we really care about in historical scientists is which of their ideas survived, not how they thought and why. All the stuff that was of its time — Kepler’s cosmic harmonies, Newton’s alchemy and eschatology, Faraday’s religiosity — must then become a curious aberration: ‘Isn’t it strange that such great minds held such weird ideas?’ It isn’t strange at all if you truly care about history.

It’s surely the attraction of this heroic vision that explains why scientists play fast and loose with history. Of course, history almost inevitably gets simplified in the popular retelling, and Eric Hobsbawm has pointed out that all trades and institutions invent their own myths. Yet scientists do seem to have an unusual susceptibility for bowdlerised narrative, pantheons and idols. And these almost always serve the didactic purpose of presenting science as a noble, brave and objective quest for truth in the face of ideology and superstition, whether that is Galileo versus the pope or Einstein versus the Nazis. In these stories, great scientists shake off the shackles, while dogma and prejudice capitulate to unreason.

As an illustration of how illiberal political systems inhibit science, Paul Nurse recently claimed that Hitler’s regime denounced relativity as ‘Jewish science’. In fact, the Nazis ended up ignoring the few careerist and racist physicists who supported the nonsense of ‘Aryan physics’ because they rightly recognised that Einstein’s colleagues had the more useful theories. A determination to present science as a calling that is ‘above’ politics and ideology goes hand in hand with the simplistic view of the fictitious ‘scientific method’ that many scientists hold, in which they simply test their theories to destruction against the unrelenting candour of experiment. Needless to say, that’s rarely how it really works.

Read the rest.

Chart of the day: Americans grow fatter in crash


Fresh from Gallup, which reports that, since 2007, “Americans in nearly every age group today are more likely to be obese than those same age groups were four years ago. Obesity is up the most among older adults. For example, 14.4% of 84- to 87-year-olds are obese today, up from 12.2% in 2008. Obesity remains most prevalent in middle age.”

Click on the image to enlarge:

Just how much of the impact is due to anxiety and how much to our ongoing exposure to environmental chemicals like BPA remains an open question.

Pesticide exposure linked to bee colony collapse


First, a video report from Nature News:

And the story, from Charlotte Stoddart of Nature News:

Bees, the most important pollinators of crops, are in trouble. All over the world, their populations are decreasing and scientists and farmers want to know why. In some cases, such as the widely reported colony collapses in North America in 2006, it is probably down to disease. But a blooming crop of research suggests that pesticides are also to blame.

Earlier this year, two studies published in Science showed that colonies are severely affected when bees are exposed to neonicotinoid pesticides of the kind commonly sprayed on crops. In one study, exposure led to a significant loss of queens in colonies of bumblebees (Bombus terrestris). In the other, on honeybees (Apis mellifera), the insecticide interfered with the foragers’ ability to navigate back to the hive.

Now, in a study published in Nature, researchers at Royal Holloway, University of London, in Egham, UK, show that low-level exposure to a combination of two pesticides is more harmful to bumblebee colonies than either pesticide on its own. The results suggest that current methods for regulating pesticides are inadequate because they consider only lethal doses of single pesticides. As ecologist Nigel Raine explains in the video, low doses of pesticides have subtle effects on individual bees and can seriously harm colonies. He hopes that his work will feed into consultations on pesticide regulations that are happening now in Europe.

And while we’re on the subject of noxious effects of pesticides, consider this headline from Op-Ed News:

Six largest pesticide corporations funding effort to try to defeat GMO labeling Proposition 37

Another small shaker, next to Cal Stadium


The latest quake, striking six minutes before this post, hit just four buildings south of U. C. Berkeley’s California Memorial Stadium, directly in front of the  Alpha Chi Omega house at 2313 Warring Street.

Here’s the date from the quake’s  U.S. Geological Survey web page:

Magnitude 2.3
Date-Time
  • Sunday, October 21, 2012 at 03:02:24 UTC
  • Saturday, October 20, 2012 at 08:02:24 PM at epicenter
Location 37.869°N, 122.251°W
Depth 7.7 km (4.8 miles)
Region SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA, CALIFORNIA
Distances
  • 2 km (1 miles) E (99°) from Berkeley, CA
  • 5 km (3 miles) ESE (123°) from Albany, CA
  • 5 km (3 miles) NE (41°) from Emeryville, CA
  • 8 km (5 miles) NNW (346°) from Oakland, CA
Location Uncertainty horizontal +/- 0.2 km (0.1 miles); depth +/- 0.3 km (0.2 miles)
Parameters Nph= 56, Dmin=1 km, Rmss=0.14 sec, Gp= 22°,
M-type=duration magnitude (Md), Version=1

A timely video: GMO Ticking Time Bomb


With Proposition 37, the California ballot measure to require labeling of foods, plunging in popularity because of a massive advertising campaign funded by Monsanto, DuPont, and other Big Agra giants, we decided it’s time to offer some support for the measure.

So here’s a documentary from Gary Null:

GMO Ticking Time Bomb – Part 1

GMO Ticking Time Bomb – Part 2

Monsanto has kicked in $7 million to the No on 37 campaign, with DuPont adding another $5 million. Altogether, the No camp has raised $34.6 million, compared to the $5.5 million raised by supporters of the measure.

Lisa Baertlein of Reuters reports on the impact:

An intense advertising blitz, funded by Monsanto Co and others, has eroded support for a California ballot proposal that would require U.S. food makers to disclose when their products contain genetically modified organisms.

>snip<

For more than a week, an opposition group funded by Monsanto, PepsiCo Inc and others has dominated television and radio air time with ads portraying the labeling proposal as an arbitrary set of new rules that will spawn frivolous lawsuits and boost food prices, positions disputed by supporters of the proposed new measures.

>snip<

Support for the GMO labeling proposal has plummeted to 48.3 percent from 66.9 percent two weeks ago, according to an online survey of 830 likely California voters conducted for the California Business Roundtable and Pepperdine University’s School of Public Policy by M4 Strategies.

At the same time, the proportion of respondents likely to vote “no” on the measure – known as Proposition 37 – jumped to 40.2 percent from 22.3 percent two weeks ago, according to the survey results released on Thursday.

Read the rest.

We’re voting yes.

From the annals of scientific research: Drink up!


From Reuters, a report on research that leads us to suspect the shape of bar glasses will be changing soon, to the profit of brewers and barkeeps:

Headline of the day: Votes to repeal law of gravity


From The Guardian:

Republican congressman Paul Broun dismisses evolution and other theories

Member of House science committee says evolution, Big Bang theory and embryology are ‘lies straight from the pit of hell’

A reminder: Tonight’s the night for GMO meeting


A very important meeting tonight in Berkeley will confront some of the most important issues of the day, both for folks concerned about the future of the University of California and for the world.

We hope to see you there.

Headline of the day: Say hello to the Pizzly Bear


From Spiegel, reporting on a climate change hybrid. And, yes, that’s what they call them:

As Arctic Melts, Polar and Grizzly Bears Mate

Headline of the day: Perfect 1950′s horror film


From Nature’s news blog:

Buddhist ‘Iron Man’ found by Nazis is from space

A reminder: Questioning the Green Agenda


An important talk coming up this Thursday here in Berkeley with some excellent speakers, some of whom we know and respect.

Another shaker hits the Berkeley Hills, a 2.7 roller


The quake hit at 09:25, felt distinctly here at Casa esnl as a roller, a tremor that came in two distinct pulse, milliseconds apart. The epicenter was directly beneath Oak Ridge Road in the Berkeley Hills, south of Tunnel Road and not far from Hazel Road, the epicenter of Wednesday night’s quake.

Here’s the info from the U.S. Geological Survey’s web page fot today’s shaker:h

Magnitude 2.7
Date-Time
  • Friday, September 28, 2012 at 16:25:55 UTC
  • Friday, September 28, 2012 at 09:25:55 AM at epicenter
Location 37.856°N, 122.242°W
Depth 7.2 km (4.5 miles)
Region SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA, CALIFORNIA
Distances
  • 3 km (2 miles) ESE (121°) from Berkeley, CA
  • 4 km (2 miles) NNW (346°) from Piedmont, CA
  • 5 km (3 miles) ENE (61°) from Emeryville, CA
  • 7 km (4 miles) N (350°) from Oakland, CA
Location Uncertainty horizontal +/- 0.2 km (0.1 miles); depth +/- 0.3 km (0.2 miles)
Parameters Nph= 63, Dmin=2 km, Rmss=0.13 sec, Gp= 22°,
M-type=duration magnitude (Md), Version=1

Another small quake rocks the Berkeley Hills


A 2.3 tremor hit Berkeley late Wednesday night, with the epicenter on Hazel road just four homes east of Claremont Avenue, not far from the Claremont Hotel.

Here’s the info from the quake’s U.S. Geological Survey web page:

Magnitude 2.3
Date-Time
Location 37.856°N, 122.246°W
Depth 7.4 km (4.6 miles)
Region SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA, CALIFORNIA
Distances
  • 3 km (2 miles) SE (124°) from Berkeley, CA
  • 4 km (2 miles) NNW (342°) from Piedmont, CA
  • 4 km (3 miles) ENE (58°) from Emeryville, CA
  • 7 km (4 miles) NNW (347°) from Oakland, CA
Location Uncertainty horizontal +/- 0.2 km (0.1 miles); depth +/- 0.3 km (0.2 miles)
Parameters Nph= 53, Dmin=2 km, Rmss=0.14 sec, Gp= 22°,
M-type=duration magnitude (Md), Version=1

Important talk: Questioning the Green Agenda


For local readers, here’s an important event coming up next week. See you there! Click on the image to enlarge.

Headline of the day II: Or is it caws and effect?


From Discover Magazine:

Crows Understand Cause and Effect, Even When the Cause is Hidden