"A joint study of the U.S. Department of Energy and the U.S. Department of Agriculture concludes that the United States could produce 60 billion gallons of ethanol by 2030 through a combination of grain and cellulosic feedstocks, enough to replace 30% of projected U.S. gasoline demand."

Hi Nate, nice article. About the part above, are you talking about the 2005 Oak Ridge National Lab report referred to as the “Billion Ton Study.” I found this quote from the ORNL web site:

Jonathan Mielenz, leader of the Bioconversion Science and Technology Group in ORNL's Biosciences Division, says, "The Billion Ton study was a critical contribution because it provided evidence for the biomass ethanol and chemical industries that a real and substantial resource base could be potentially available from which to build their businesses. This knowledge gave decision makers in government and elsewhere credible arguments to support funding and policy decisions needed for a fledgling biorefinery industry."

The study seemed to come across as a bit promotion piece meant to satisfy the desires of the administration to find 'an answer' to liquid fuel imports. Given the more recent news about biofuels, I wonder how they feel about that report now? However, they were emphasizing future cellulosic, not starch-based like today.

Furthermore, I interviewed David Fridley of the Berkeley Lab and he said their biomass numbers were highly inflated, and the logistics of using that biomass became ridiculous.

http://globalpublicmedia.com/the_reality_report_the_myths_of_biofuels

Wondering if anyone else has looked carefully at that report from your sort of perspective (which I consider sane).