• The Conference

Industrial Program Leader, Olsson Associates		 3 Questions with
Shawn Zablocki of Olsson Associates
Your abstract suggested that ethanol plants were often unaware of required integrity testing on their tanks and vessels. Why do you think that is?
It is not so much that the plants aren’t aware that testing is required, rather they are often unaware of the codes and standards that various tanks and vessel should be inspected to. For example, we have seen a number of Spill Plans (SPCC) that call for all tanks and vessel to be inspected to API 653, when API 653 only applies to larger field erected tanks. Many smaller tanks will fall under the Steel Tank Institute, ST001. Misapplying codes can result in additional cost and testing frequencies for facilities or conversely possible missing something if a lower standard is applied.

What is the single best reason ethanol plants should circle back on integrity testing and make it a regular and robust part of their maintenance program?
First of all integrity testing of various tanks, vessels and pipe systems, is required by OSHA’s Process Safety Management standard and EPA’s Spill Prevention Control and Countermeasure (SPCC) requirements. Secondly, a robust mechanical integrity testing program allows facilities to optimize the life of tanks and vessels, while minimizing risk of downtime in the event of a vessel or pipe system failure.

Many plants in operation today are approaching ten years since they were built and commissioned. Presentations about mechanical integrity were at an all-time high for this year’s FEW. Is the focus within the industry on this issue connected to the fact that the ethanol fleet isn’t brand new anymore?
The increased focus is likely a combination of things. The 10 year mark triggers inspections under certain codes, external inspections for tanks covered by API 653 and internal inspections for pressure vessels covered by API 510. Secondly, as the industry matures, the awareness of the importance of items such as integrity testing of tanks and vessel is increasing. Finally, is just the simple age factor and the fact that some facilities have seen issues in various parts of their operations and word has spread about some of those issues prompting facilities to get more active in this arena.

Track 1: Production and Operations
Wednesday, June 22 | 10:30 am - Noon
Proactive Measures for Producers Confronting Aging Facilities with Vital Components Nearing the End of their Service Lives
With a good portion of the ethanol fleet now a decade old or more, producers are increasingly having to confront aging pipes, vessel and components. For many components, testing the mechanical integrity is required by OSHA and the EPA. Presenters in this panel will help producers better understand their compliance obligations, but will go further and highlight how to strategically approach plant aging with an eye on controlling the rate of degradation, available methods of vessel inspection and dealing with component obsolescence.


Paula Emberland, Account Manager, ERI Solution Inc.
Understanding How Mechanical Integrity can Reduce Costs and Improve Safety at Your Plant
Shawn Zablocki
Olsson Associates
Mechanical Integrity Testing of Tanks, Vessels and Piping Systems

Paul Cook
Vice President, Painters USA Inc.
Protecting Your Infrastructure, the Capital Investment in Your Facility, and Compliance in the Ethanol Industry
Mitch Manstedt
Strategic Business Leader, U.S. Water
Plant Reliability: Outdated Controls and Equipment in Aging Ethanol Facilities

View Agenda   View Panel Descriptions   Register Now


Biofuels Analyst, Platts		 3 Questions with
Jordan Godwin of Platts
After years of corn-ethanol RINs (renewable identification numbers) being valued at a penny or two, while biodiesel and advanced biofuel RINs were higher, these days D6 RINs are worth 70 cents or better and just a few pennies under the others. Is any of that value getting back to the ethanol producer at all?
As anyone involved in U.S. biofuels markets can attest, the RINs market is a wild and irrational one. It doesn’t always follow the traditional supply/demand rules of the standard market, and there has always been a tremendous amount of paranoia built into the values. On that note, an irrationally small amount of that RIN price finds its way back into the producer’s margin. RIN paranoia has propped margins in the past, but U.S. ethanol producers could certainly use a more significant share of those returns in 2016.

Some predict a major shortfall of corn-based, D6 RINs in 2016. How big of a shortfall might that be, and what are the implications?
If there’s anything U.S. ethanol producers can be optimistic about in the second half of 2016 and the first half of 2017, it’s the strong likelihood of another RINs rally. With ethanol prices around $1.50/gallon, it’s unlikely that RINs prices could again top $1/RIN, but no one is bold enough to rule it out at this point. The reason being, although U.S. ethanol production has been cranking strong at a record pace, blending and subsequent RIN generation, has fallen short of the EPA’s mandated target. While prior-year ethanol RINs and D4 biomass-based diesel RINs will be waiting in the wings to save the day, the situation is likely to intensify in the coming months, especially if the EPA proposes another strong target for 2017.

What are some of the moving factors that impact the RINs market? Has this new RINs market begun to develop predictable patterns?
The biggest single factor in the cost of a RIN is policy outlook. Because the federal government sets the targets in the Renewable Fuel Standard, obligated parties have little choice but to abide by the mandated volumes. In previous RIN rallies, many obligated parties were simply blindsided by shortfalls. After those major scares, traders are generally much more conservative with RIN-buying, putting the biggest variable wild-card in the hands of the government.

Track 2: Leadership and Financial Management
Tuesday, June 21 | 1:30 pm - 3:00 pm
Bringing the RIN Market into Clearer Focus While Deploying Strategies to Maximize their Financial Impact
This panel will examine the RIN environment from a number of different angles. The first presentation will answer the question of whether or not QAP-certified RINs garner a premium for producers. Additional presentations include strategies for considering an investment to generate D3 RINs and a discussion about a potential RIN shortfall toward the end of 2016 and what it may mean for the industry.
Ashley Player
Weaver and Tidwell LLP
QAP for D6 RINs
Lily Wachter
Edeniq Inc.
Diversify into D3 RINs to Hedge Commodity Risk
Jordan Godwin
Platts
Counting RINs: The Shortfall Ahead

View Agenda   View Panel Descriptions   Register Now




Vice President, Degart Global		 3 Questions with
Gary DeLong of Degart Global
What is the biggest challenge for plant managers as they strive to meet the September deadline?
Time. To implement the Food Safety Modernization Act (FSMA) takes time to involve several staff from upper management, laboratory personnel, maintenance, control room staff, receiving etc. Organizing meetings, documenting risk assessment and corrective action takes input from each department. With staffs running lean in each department getting time for group discussions and training will be one of the biggest challenges.

Besides being in compliance, how will this implementation provide value?
This is an opportunity for the ethanol industry to show their commitment to provide safe feed ingredients to the entire livestock industry. Over the past few years ethanol plants have been working and adapting new technologies and knowledge. This implementation process will provide staff and customers confidence that ethanol plants have and always can provide high value and safe feed products.

How should ethanol plant managers prepare their staffs for the changes in compliance rules?
Assign a coordinator that has authority that can gather information from extension service, associations, internet, experienced consultants and attend training. This person should be able to delegate this information to create a team that can assist in the implementation. Understand that this is not only a September 2016 issue but an ongoing one with possible changes as FSMA becomes fully implemented. This will require continual attention for internal updating.

Track 3: Coproducts and Product Diversification
Tuesday, June 21 | 1:30 pm - 3:00 pm
How to Meet This September’s Food Safety Modernization Act Compliance Deadline with Ease
The Food Safety Modernization Act rule was finalized in the fall of 2015 and many producers have compliance deadlines this calendar year. This panel is a must for at least one representative from each producing facility. Presenters will share with attendees what the rule means for their facility and best practices for compliance including the preparation of required food safety plans, the performance of hazard analysis, the development of a recall plan and much more.
Chris Bliley
Growth Energy
FSMA and an Industry Plan for Compliance
David Glass
D. Glass Associates Inc.
A Proposal to Simplify Regulatory Approvals for Use of Genetically Modified Yeast in Distillers Coproducts
Gary DeLong
Degart Global
Implementation of Risk Based Assessment for FSMA for Ethanol Plants

View Agenda   View Panel Descriptions   Register Now



Director of Technical Operations, Bion Analytical		 3 Questions with
Kristi Plack of Bion Analytical
You did a proficiency testing program this past year for ethanol laboratories. What did that involve and how many participated?
In July 2015, we produced and sent an HPLC profile laboratory proficiency sample to ethanol production facilities to analyze and report their results back to be included in a statistical report. We received data from 71 laboratories.

What did you learn? Was there one analysis where the participants’ results showed a lot of variability or, conversely, a lot of accuracy, when compared to the known sample tested?
Important decisions are being made based on the laboratory data and not all data is created equal. The results reiterated the importance for labs to test themselves against a known value.

We only included HPLC analysis but I was surprised at the range of results for some of the sugars. Lactic and acetic acid had large ranges as well, but that did not surprise me. Ethanol results showed that 90 percent of the data included in the analysis (outliers removed) was within plus-or-minus 3 percent of the true value and all results were within plus-or-minus 5 percent of the true value.

Why is it important for ethanol labs to check their proficiency? How often should it be done?
Real-time and long-term decisions are being made based on laboratory data that needs to be accurate day in and day out. One of the best ways to know where your laboratory accuracy stands is to be part of a proficiency program where you can compare your results to the sample’s true value and the mean of your peer laboratories.

Proficiency testing is best done three to four times per year. There are constant changes going on in laboratories: personnel, standards, HPLC columns and reagents, to name a few. Participating in an annual proficiency testing may not capture these changes. One other item on proficiency testing—data integrity is essential. Errors from typos and incorrect units are observed at times during data analysis.

Track 1: Production and Operations
Wednesday, June 22 | 8:30 am - 10:00 am
A Data Driven Lab: The Undeniable Benefit of Building a Culture of Information-based Decision Making at Your Plant
An industry wide recognition of the value of data capture at ethanol production facilities has producers wading through a veritable sea of information across all areas of their operation. The new frontier in plant data programs is streamlining the process by which producers decide what data to look at and how to effectively interpret what they see. Presenters in the panel will offer producers ideas on both third-party data management solutions and in-house programs that can unlock the potential in the ocean of information flowing by producers on a daily basis.


Laurie Duval
Senior Manager, Technical Service, Bioenergy, Novozymes (Canada)
Unlocking the Potential of Your Plant Data for Profitability
Anne Chronic
Phibro Ethanol Performance Group
Unlocking the B.E.S.T. at Your Plant
Kristi Plack
Bion Analytical
Defensible Laboratory Data 201
Ben Sunderhaus
Lallemand Biofuels & Distilled Spirits
Successful Troubleshooting in a Fuel Ethanol Production Facility

View Agenda   View Panel Descriptions   Register Now



Director EHSS, Green Plains Inc.		 3 Questions with
Erica Montefusco of Green Plains Inc.
How do you spot a potential top-notch employee during a job interview?
I focus on more on their ability to hold a conversation than following a script. If they are able to talk, without stumbling, about something they are passionate about, I really don’t care about the topic, I just want to know that they are able to explain something to me. That is an important skill that translates to many aspects of the job. II also like candidates that come to the interview with good questions. I am not interested in the questions you google on-line to ask about the company or future or management styles. Bring your own unique questions, make me remember you, and give us something to chat about further. Avoid the yes/no questions. I want to chat and get to know you, that’s what sells me.

What do you do to retain him or her?
Retention for our EHSS staff is about lots of training, lots of experience early on. You travel, you get to know our philosophy as a company, not just one plant. You encounter lots of new situations. We try to stimulate you, make you think for yourself. We are training you to make good decisions, learn to ask for help. We never criticize or discourage collaboration, we encourage team work. If you need resources, you need to ask, we want to know, we will accommodate them. But the system only works if you ask.

How do you determine what motivates a given employee?
Much of this is determined as part of the hiring process, so we have a pretty good idea of the person we are hiring, and we target certain traits before hiring. However, our on-boarding and training program is very intense. The learning is very hands-on and interactive. Within the first week or two, the communication is quite extensive. This allows us, as Senior Management to evaluate the new hire and figure out their likely strengths and weaknesses. Then we can target the next couple of months of training to those traits. As the employee sees their skills improve, they tend to thrive and are encouraged to become increasingly engaged.

Track 2: Leadership and Financial Management
Wednesday, June 22 | 3:30 pm - 5:00 pm
How to Build your Very Own Dream Team and Grow it into Your Operation’s Most Valuable Asset
Plant management teams know that achieving operational and financial goals at their facilities requires buy-in from a motivated and effective team. This panel will outline strategies for attracting quality employees, getting them trained up and retaining them as their overall value to the operation increases. Special attention will be given to the means by which human resources teams can build and maintain a funnel of qualified individuals so that when inevitable staff turnover occurs, they aren’t starting from scratch.


Moderator: Renee Loesche
Southeastern Illinois College-BioFuels Technology
Ron Faciane
GP Strategies
Bridging the Skilled Workforce Gaps to Improve Operations and Reduce Total Cost of Ownership
Justin Mentele
Manufacturing & Biofuels Group
KCoe Isom, LLP, Build Your Team to have Staying Power
Gary Weihs
Kincannon & Reed
Identifying and Attracting Top Talent
Erica Montefusco
Green Plains Inc.
Creating Your Own Pipeline of Talent

View Agenda   View Panel Descriptions   Register Now



Product Manager, ICM Inc.		 3 Questions with
Adam Anderson of ICM Inc.
Most new technologies seem to provide opportunities for lessons learned as they get implemented. Can you comment on a few of the lessons ICM has learned with its early adopters of Fiber Separation Technology?
Without a doubt, new technology continues to improve within our industry and with the changes, comes opportunity to learn and grow. ICM’s Fiber Separation Technology (FST) has presented opportunities for ICM and our customer partners to analyze both equipment and processes to move forward. I believe the main lesson learned from our early adopters though, is that FST is truly a fully integrated technology, meaning it touches and has the potential to change most operational variables unique to any individual plant. It has required our teams to join forces to evaluate and understand the variances and requires a commitment to ensure success is achieved.

What are the top three benefits that can be gained from fiber separation?
FST has various benefits depending on opportunities available at a specific plant. Three primary goals for the technology are: 1) to increase ethanol production as a low-cost capacity addition; 2) to increase distillers oil production; and 3) to open the door for differentiation of distillers grains coproducts by concentrating the various fractions such as protein, fiber and oil. Some of the key factors that help determine what benefits a specific plant can see will be presented in my talk at the FEW.

Do you see any opportunities arising from the concentrated process flows that remain after the fiber is removed at the front end of the process?
Yes, being able to separate and concentrate process flows is the path to diversification, and diversification is what can allow plants to sustain profitability in multiple market conditions. Making ethanol from starch, distillers oil from germ, and distillers grains from protein and fiber isn’t always enough. ICM is on the forefront and focusing its efforts to provide customers ways to break into new markets that can increase crush margins, and FST is an enabling technology with the potential to get them there.

Track 3: Coproducts and Product Diversification
Wednesday, June 22 | 1:30 pm - 3:00 pm
Greater Than the Sum of Its Parts: Production Approaches that Enable Producers to Capture Maximum Value from Inbound Corn
Once proven, the uptake of corn oil extraction technologies swept across the industry as producers readily embraced their revenue generation potential. This co-product opportunity continues to evolve and this panel will provide producers with a snapshot of the technologies available to not only maximize their corn oil program, but also to position their facility for process steps beyond simple extraction to include fiber separation in anticipation of the fermentation of these streams to cellulosic ethanol.


Jennifer Aurandt
Valicor, Inc.
Corn Oil Extraction Optimization for Disc Stack Centrifuges
Min Wang
Croda Inc
Oil Yield Optimization with Surfactant Extraction Aids Based on Their HLB Values
Adam Anderson
ICM, Inc.
Low Fiber Ferms – Lessons Learned, Benefits, and Opportunities Ahead
Michael Franko
Fluid Quip Process Technologies LLC
Co-Product Optimization: A Wet Milling Perspective for Dry Mills

View Agenda   View Panel Descriptions   Register Now



Strategic Accounts Manager, Weas Engineering Inc.		 3 Questions with
Randy McDaniel of Weas Engineering Inc.
Why should plants care about Legionella?
First and foremost, Legionella poses a health threat. Legionella can cause Legionnaires’ disease, which can be fatal, and Pontiac fever. Should an Ethanol Plant Cooling Tower become contaminated with Legionella, procedures to remediate the system could require the cooling tower fans to be shut off resulting in overheated fermentation. Should someone contract Legionnaires’ Disease from an Ethanol Plant Cooling Tower, the CDC has developed a procedure to clean it. Following this procedure could result in the Ethanol Plant being left with a significant volume of unfermented mash and several hundred thousand gallons of cooling water that is likely difficult to properly dispose of.

Why are ethanol plants at risk for Legionella?
Cooling towers are known to harbor Legionella. They operate under ideal growth conditions. If the Ethanol Plant discharges cooling water directly to the environment, many commercially available biocides are limited from use making it harder to respond to contamination.

What can plants do to prevent Legionella?
Creating and following a Water Management Program as outlined in the ASHRAE 188-2015 is a great starting place. Plants should develop their own testing, if desired, frequency and responses to various levels of contamination. Keeping Legionella out of water is the key to preventing infection.

Track 1: Production and Operations
Wednesday, June 22 | 10:30 am - Noon
Ensuring Your Plant’s Water Program Keeps Pace in an Environment of Increased Risks and Regulatory Requirements
The pressure on ethanol producers with regards to their water use and re-use program continues to increase and these pressures emanate from many different fronts. This panel will help producers trying to balance the demands on their operation’s water program introduced by the Food Safety Modernization Act, new phosphorous discharge limits and emerging risks like Legionnaire’s disease.


James Michels
Nalco, an Ecolab Company
Boiler Water Recycle and Its Impact on DDG Feed Safety
Mike Mowbray
U.S. Water
Phosphorus Discharge Restrictions and Their Impact on Ethanol Plant Cooling

Randy McDaniel
Weas Engineering Inc.
Preventing Legionella from Adversely Impacting Your Ethanol Plant
Jared Galligan
U.S. Water Services Inc.
Industry Update: Water Re-Use and Reduction
Stephan Blum
Whitefox Technologies Limited
Increasing Capacity with Existing Steam Supply

View Agenda   View Panel Descriptions   Register Now



Business Development, Arisdyne Systems		 3 Questions with
Ryan Heuer of Arisdyne Systems
Ethanol executives and boards face tough decisions as they develop strategic plans for their facilities. Can you give a preview of one of the key, strategic, decision-making paradigms that you will be talking about in your FEW presentation?
Most ethanol organizations seem to be working through the dilemma of ‘cellulosic ethanol’ as they assign the daunting tasks of collecting feasibility information and cost analyses across the organization. If we may interrupt the technical discussions and innovation enthusiasm for a minute to take a forest-wide look at where we are collectively, some of the traditional industry evaluation tools, such as Porter’s 5 Forces, may help highlight what’s worth extra focus in the near term….or at least offer the grounds for a fun conversation or two in the hallway.

Is the primary strategic choice for ethanol producers to either differentiate or diversify?
Companies in any industry must choose cost-leadership or differentiation. Organizations with less clear objectives and strategies struggle to remain competitive and to accomplish ideal returns. Traditionally, ethanol producers have found success in pursuing the cost-leadership strategy by means of diversification. This makes sense and is intuitive in a commodity-based industry. But, as a question more so than an assertion, does the carbon-accounting market offer the chance to genuinely differentiate the ethanol industry’s end products? If so, are we careful to make the conscious decisions to switch strategies?

It’s interesting that Arisdyne is taking a high-level approach in your FEW presentation in talking about strategic decision making, rather than a presentation about your technology itself. Is there a story behind that?
Similar to the presentation’s message itself, I feel technology companies also can get too caught up in the technical weeds and miss the true objective. At this juncture in our not-quite-as-young-as-we-used-to-be business, we are evolving from ‘selling’ to ‘developing.’ In addition to upgrading our existing technology to be higher performing and more efficient, Arisdyne is working on a handful of new applications for biofuels. We aspire to work with, and learn from, big-picture partners and hope those who share a similar interest in the health and betterment of the industry may find our approach somewhat entertaining and perhaps a little refreshing.

Track 2: Leadership and Financial Management
Wednesday, June 22 | 8:30 am - 10:00 am
Using Well-Considered and Strategic Capital Planning to Manage Risk, Project Financial Performance and Maintain Company Liquidity
This panel will event ethanol plant teams to lift their gaze beyond the financial realities their plants face this quarter or this year and instead to begin thinking in terms of multiple years into the future. Presentations will illustrate how this approach will offer producers a platform to simultaneously consider and plan for the retiring of debt, the issuance of dividends and the investments vital to maintaining the asset.


Moderator: Tim Portz
Executive Editor, Ethanol Producer Magazine
Sherry Jean Larson
Christianson & Associates, PLLP
What Matters to the CFO?
Kirk Martin
Ascendant Partners Inc.
Ethanol Companies Evolve from Annual Budgeting to Multi-Year Capital Planning
Ryan Heuer
Arisdyne Systems
Strategic Management: Ethanol Managers and Today's Decisions
Ed Garibian
eRPortal Software Group LLC
Ethanol Plant Asset Management, OEE and Capital Planning

View Agenda   View Panel Descriptions   Register Now



Senior Environmental Scientist, RTP Environmental Associates Inc.		 3 Questions with
Jessica Buckley of RTP Environmental Associates Inc.
How can ethanol producers take advantage of the market opportunity provided by California’s and Oregon’s Low Carbon Fuel Standards?
Ethanol producers currently have a unique opportunity to market fuel in these states based on how efficient the facility is running the production process. Even simple process improvements or energy efficient modifications can lead to more dollars through a lower Carbon Intensity (CI) value. The lower the CI number, the more of a market advantage the facility has against competitors. Therefore, it can literally pay to reduce the plant’s carbon footprint. Tapping into Oregon’s market in addition to California will increase the facility’s opportunity to take advantage of another market area’s low carbon fuel benefits.

What are the most important recordkeeping requirement associated with the LCFSs?
There are really four main drivers that contribute to the CI value under the California LCFS Tier I process; they include ethanol production, amount of feedstock (grain, etc.) used, total energy/fuel usage and total electricity usage at the facility. Although there are other contributing factors, these four parameters are the primary values that drive the CI value. Records should also be maintained for those parameters used to calculate facility CI, such as Bill of Ladings, energy invoices, grain receipts and any other documentation verifying throughput/production amounts.

How can companies coordinate programs and minimize environmental compliance issues that overlap, and as a result, cut costs and improve environmental records?
Recordkeeping is crucial through most areas of environmental compliance. The records I mentioned above may be required for a variety of compliance programs, including (but not limited to) air emission inventories, RFS RINs, air permit limits, Toxic Release Inventories, etc. One option may be to keep daily/monthly records related to these programs in one spreadsheet that employs formulas to calculate the required values and therefore reduce the need to populate multiple files with the same compliance data thus reducing potential errors. Coordinating data should also improve compliance monitoring, therefore reducing excursions from permitted values that may be subject to fines or enforcement actions (both of which can be time consuming and costly). It may also assist the facility in tracking any inadequacies in production efficiency. Of course, any improvements in plant efficiency can also help save money.

Track 4: Infrastructure and Market Development
Wednesday, June 22 | 8:30 am - 10:00 am
How an Active Carbon Reduction Program Can Deliver Real Marketplace Advantage for Savvy Producers
While the industry continues its efforts to unlock market access via E15 and mid-level blends, more and more producers are eyeing California’s existing Low Carbon Fuel Standards as a here and now opportunity to sell increased volumes. This panel will offer producers a look at a number of different pathways to drive down their plant’s carbon intensity thereby qualifying their gallons for this promising market. Additionally, the correlation between low carbon production and lower energy costs will be explored.


Moderator:
Ed Erminger
Somes-Nick & Company
Jessica Buckley
RTP Environmental Associates Inc.
Market Advantages for Efficient, Low-Carbon Fuel Production

Bernie Hoffman
K-Coe Isom
The Impact of Carbon Intensity on Ethanol
Nick Franco
U.S. Energy Services Inc.
Protect your Margin: Manage Power Costs and Minimize Carbon Intensity
Jamie Rhodes
Trestle Energy
Agricultural Residue Coproducts: The Key to Unlocking LCFS Markets

View Agenda   View Panel Descriptions   Register Now




CEO, ICM Inc.		 3 Questions with
Dave VanderGriend of ICM Inc.
In the simplest of terms, why is the Urban Air Initiative worthy of the ethanol industry’s support and attention?
The bottom line is that no one else is focused on all of the little details preventing consumers from getting access to mid-level ethanol blends. Through years of technical research, Urban Air Initiative uncovered significant regulatory barriers at the EPA that will continue to harm our industry unless our efforts are successful. That’s why we’re working to improve public policy by promoting ethanol’s true value as a clean octane source that reduces pollution and improve air quality.

Is ethanol capable of replacing all of these harmful aromatics in our gasoline?
It’s impossible to replace all aromatics because some of them naturally accrue in crude oil. But simply adding ethanol to gasoline will replace the most toxic aromatics currently added to boost octane. Ethanol not only costs less than aromatics, it provides higher octane, reduces vehicle emissions, and improves air quality.

If the EPA decided tomorrow that aromatics needed to be regulated and required ethanol to be used for increased octane, what kind of annual production volume of would be needed?
The demand for ethanol would double if the EPA required that ethanol be used as a clean octane source instead of aromatics. But we don’t even need the EPA to make that kind of mandate for ethanol production to increase. Simply lifting the regulatory barriers will allow ethanol to be valued for what it is, an affordable clean octane source that will improve air quality.

General Session Panel
Tuesday, June 21
Exploring Strategies to Unlock Greater Marketplace Access for Conventional and Advanced Biofuels



Moderator:
Tom Bryan
President, BBI International & Editor in Chief, Ethanol Producer Magazine
Dave VanderGriend
CEO, ICM Inc.
Robert White
Vice President of Industry Relations, Renewable Fuels Association
Mike O’Brien
Vice President of Market Development, Growth Energy

View Agenda   View Panel Descriptions   Register Now


Platinum Level Sponsors

Gold Level Sponsors

Silver Level Sponsors

Supporting Organizations

Media Partner

Produced By