• The Heritage Network
    • Resize:
    • A
    • A
    • A
  • Donate
  • Great Green Fleece: Air Force Spends $59 Per Gallon for Biofuel

    The U.S. Air Force spent $59 per gallon on biofuels for a demonstration last month intended to show the promise of the alternative energy source. That’s more than double what the U.S. Navy spent as part of its so-called Great Green Fleet demonstration.

    The total cost for the 11,000 gallons of synthetic jet fuel from Gevo Inc., a Colorado-based company, amounts to $639,000.

    For its demonstration, Navy officials spent $12 million on 450,000 gallons of fuel, or approximately $26 a gallon. Combining the fuel with petroleum in a 50-50 mixture reduces the cost per gallon to around $15, more than four times the cost of petroleum alone. The company providing the Navy’s biofuel, Solazyme, was a recipient of stimulus grant funding.

    The report from Reuters also indicated that among Gevo’s financial backers is Vinod Khosla, a venture capitalist whose firm owns 27 percent of the company. Reuters noted that Khosla has donated overwhelmingly to Democratic candidates in recent elections.

    Secretary of the Navy Ray Mabus has repeatedly touted the benefits of expanding the Navy’s use of alternative fuel sources such as biofuels.

    “It was worthwhile to show that biofuels can compete and can be used in every single thing that we do in the Navy. Everything before now has been a test. This shows that we can use biofuels and other alternative energies in an operational manner,” said Mabus in a conference call following the Naval exercise’s conclusion.

    Mabus and other Defense Department officials have cited increases in petroleum prices as the reason for exploring biofuel integration, which drew criticism from Republican officials.

    “You are not the secretary of energy, you are the secretary of the Navy,” said Rep. Randy Forbes (R-VA). Forbes says he supports green energy, but facing budget priorities, finds the expenses inappropriate.

    The test of Gevo biofuels occurred in late June in Florida.

    Gevo’s president praised the opportunity to test the company’s product.

    “This is a great accomplishment for the USAF, Gevo and the biofuels industry. We’ve validated that ATJ from isobutanol is a clean burning, homegrown, drop-in jet fuel,” said Chris Ryan in a statement.

    Ryan hopes that the Air Force demonstration “has taken the industry one step closer to full commercialization. We remain committed to commercialization and believe we have the most economic route to deliver aviation biofuels at scale.”

    How the company will reach commercialization and scale production to levels necessary to meet purchase demands from the Department of Defense relies on the future construction of a commercial-scale refinery. Currently, the company produces only 7,500 to 8,000 gallons of biofuel per month. The Air Force’s purchase represents more than a month’s worth of production.

    The Pentagon issued a report in 2011, “Opportunities for DoD use of Alternative and Renewable Fuels,” which highlights the expected production gap between departmental demand and the projected supply of the so-called “drop-in” fuels by 2020. That gap exceeds 450 million gallons between expected demand and the highest production estimate available.

    Even should economies of scale and commercial-size refining capabilities be attained, the Pentagon still expects to pay a $2.2 billion premium on annual fuel costs by 2020. Per gallon premiums are estimated to be between $1.43 and $5.24 by 2015. The premium represents a 10 percent to 15 percent increase over currently-used “conventional petroleum fuels,” according to the report.

    Wired highlighted the gap between projected demand and potential deliverables within the biofuels sector, and with expectations that costs would eventually reach competitive levels with petroleum-only sources.

    Repeated attempts to clarify the assumptions made by Mabus and other Pentagon officials have not been forthcoming, even to members of Congress or the Congressional Research Service:

    “One of Washington’s most influential naval analysts was equally flummoxed. “What is the Navy’s specific projection for how quickly prices for advanced biofuels will drop to levels competitive with those for petroleum-based fuels?” Ronald O’Rourke and his colleagues at the Congressional Research Service ask in a June 2012 report on military energy initiatives (.pdf). ”What studies did the Navy or DOD [Department of Defense] conduct to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of developing a domestic advanced biofuels industry?”

    Apparently, no one at the Navy could be bothered to tell him the answer – if an answer existed, that is.”

    Posted in Featured, Scribe [slideshow_deploy]

    8 Responses to Great Green Fleece: Air Force Spends $59 Per Gallon for Biofuel

    1. KJinAZ says:

      I would say they proved effectivly that BioFuel is not ready for prime time yet. When it gets down under the cost of gas by 20%, it will be ready. It is about 20% less efficient, so the price must be less than gas to make it equitable.

      This is simple math folks, and they didn't need to spend ANY money to figure out that it's not practical.

    2. Cliff Claven says:

      While the Air Force paid $59.00 a gallon for the biobutanol jet fuel it used in A-10 tests last month, The Navy in Feb paid $4,454.55 a gallon to Albemarle for its first batch yet to be delivered, setting the new military world record. Biofuels have zero chance of ever being cheaper than petroleum fuels because they are absolute parasites of petroleum in their production. They depend upon fossil fuel hydrogen and carbon for their fertilizers, pesticides, herbicides, farm machinery fuel, distillation heat, and even the hydrogen gas that must be added to hydro-treat the esters and alcohols of biodiesel and ethanol into true hydrocarbon fuel "drop'in" replacements. They actually consume more fossil fuel energy than they contribute back as liquid fuel, and thereby are accelerating our use of fossil fuel and increasing our dependence upon foreign oil. Not only do their prices track up and down with the international oil market, they also track with the volatility of the global food markets because of their dependence upon the same agricultural feedstocks and equipment, and they are subject to the vagaries of the weather such as freezes and droughts (USDA calling 20M bushels of corn already lost to this year's drought). Biofuels are a thermodynamic and economic dead end. Not to mention that lifecycle analyses of their greenhouse gas emissions including CO2 from burning down forests for crop land and nitrous oxide released from fertilizer (298 times worse than CO2) show they are worse contributors to global warming than burning fossil fuel directly in their place. Epic Scam.

    3. Bobbie says:

      well that's practical in these government expensed times, isn't it? Why not let government add to the financial crisis the government has already caused at all costs of everybody elses! If it wasn't for complacency, we wouldn't be here.

    4. f.lindsay says:

      OMG Pentagon OFFICIALS have LOST their MINDS- THE US MILITARY is NOT in the BUSINESS of ENERGY& bio-fuel DEVELOPMENTS-Thank GOD 4 the REPUBLICAN RepRandyForbes & his TOUGH QUESTIONING -APPARENTLY everyone that the Bozo #Obama has APPOINTED is some sort of ACADEMIC muddled dreamer,whether Communist or members of the JIHADIST MUSLIM brotherhood-either way these APPOINTEES especially SHOW us YET AGAIN ,OBAMA has got 2 go—-hopefully 2 gitmo where all the other TERRORISTS from foreign countries go.

    5. CforUS says:

      We should artificially raise the price of petroleum by shutting down drilling and restricting the use of coal and natural gas to the point that biofuels are cost effective. After all the alternative energy sector is what drives our economy. Right? If you are a liberal progressive this would make perfect fiscal sense.

    6. TimAZ says:

      I have a question. Exactly how much of the tax payer dollars for the purchase of this Bio-BS will be laundered to the politicians that support this thievery of the American citizenry? I'm sure there's a percentage rate for these kind of deals or an agreed upon some of money in the form of campaign contributions. Oh I forgot about the insider trading part of the deal. Silly me. Had enough yet?

    7. Edwin Turner says:

      Syntroleum/Tyson/Dynamic Fuels' plant in Geismar, Louisiana, processed algae oil produced by Solazyme, San Francisco, California. No edible food resources were used as feedstock.

      Syntroleum/Tyson/DF's Geismar plant is now inputting yellow grease from waste animal fat to refine into high grade diesel, not so-called biodiesel, but molecularly superior diesel, which it sells for roughly USD 5.00. That's right, yellow grease to five dollar diesel.

      Why are you children crabbing over twelve million dollars when big oil subsidies are measured in billions?

      Our armed forces need secure, renewable fuel. So if you're going to whine, whine about the big oil subsidies.

    Comments are subject to approval and moderation. We remind everyone that The Heritage Foundation promotes a civil society where ideas and debate flourish. Please be respectful of each other and the subjects of any criticism. While we may not always agree on policy, we should all agree that being appropriately informed is everyone's intention visiting this site. Profanity, lewdness, personal attacks, and other forms of incivility will not be tolerated. Please keep your thoughts brief and avoid ALL CAPS. While we respect your first amendment rights, we are obligated to our readers to maintain these standards. Thanks for joining the conversation.

    Big Government Is NOT the Answer

    Your tax dollars are being spent on programs that we really don't need.

    I Agree I Disagree ×

    Get Heritage In Your Inbox — FREE!

    Heritage Foundation e-mails keep you updated on the ongoing policy battles in Washington and around the country.

    ×