As Biden Tours Iowa, Farmers Want to Know Where He Stands on Ethanol

FILE PHOTO: Democratic 2020 U.S. presidential candidate and former Vice President Joe Biden takes questions from the audience at a campaign stop at the IBEW Local 490 in Concord, New Hampshire, U.S., June 4, 2019. REUTERS/Brian Snyder/File Photo
Brian Snyder/File Photo/Reuters

Joe Biden may have an ethanol problem.

The former U.S. vice president has pledged support for advanced biofuels as part of his bid for the 2020 Democratic presidential nomination.

But Biden, who leads the crowded Democratic field in opinion polls in Iowa and nationally, faces lingering questions in the U.S. Farm Belt over his push in 2014 as President Barack Obama‘s No. 2 to slash the amount of corn-based ethanol that refiners must blend into the country’s fuel supply.

Biden, a former U.S. senator from Delaware, was considered instrumental in orchestrating the blending cuts as a way to help struggling refineries on the East Coast deal with rising compliance costs under the U.S. Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS), a 2005 law requiring oil companies to blend increasing volumes of ethanol and other biofuels into fuel, Reuters previously reported.

A federal court struck down the cuts in 2016. But the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has yet to make the biofuel industry whole for the lost gallons despite repeated promises to do so.

That could hurt Biden in Iowa, where he kicks off a campaign tour on Tuesday. The state is America’s top corn and ethanol producer, with 44 biofuel plants that help support more than 40,000 jobs. It holds the first presidential nominating contest in 2020, and any Democratic candidate who wants to win that vote and peel off some of Republican President Donald Trump‘s Iowa support in the general election will likely have trouble if lukewarm on biofuels.

“I really hope we can finally get some answers to what happened,” said Dave Walton, a farmer who grows corn, soybeans and livestock. “Right now, I am suspicious of anything Biden will say about his commitment to ethanol, but we do need to hear from him.”

Iowa farmers and ethanol producers sent a letter, seen by Reuters, to Biden in 2014 asking him to explain his actions. They also requested a meeting that never materialized, according to those who sought it.

The RFS creates demand for Walton’s corn, lifting prices, while ethanol production produces a byproduct that serves as cheap feed for his livestock. Walton, a registered independent who voted for Trump in 2016, says his vote is up for grabs in November 2020 because of the president’s trade wars and mixed support of the RFS.

Biden released a 22-page climate policy proposal earlier this month that promised net-zero emissions and a 100 percent clean-energy economy by 2050, largely through taxpayer investments in renewable energy and electric car infrastructure. He promised to refuse campaign contributions from oil and gas executives and strengthen regulation of oil companies.

The proposal’s roughly 10,400 words did not include “ethanol,” although Biden did explicitly support advanced biofuels, which fall under the RFS umbrella.

In an email on Monday, the Biden campaign did not comment on his role or motivations in the 2014 episode. The campaign said the country’s energy revolution must be “fought for and with our farmers.”

“By doubling down on our national renewable fuel standard obligations and implementing stronger, bolder commitments that invest in ethanol and biofuels, we can loosen big oil’s grip on our nation while spurring economic growth in areas hard-hit by Trump’s trade war,” said Biden campaign spokesman Andrew Bates.


In Iowa, ethanol is not as much a threshold Democratic Party issue as abortion rights or gun control.

Ethanol is opposed by many Democrats, who see it as maintaining the reliance on fossil fuels and combustible engine vehicles. Environmentalists argue that using land to grow corn for fuel also ruins natural habitats. Studies on the environmental benefits of ethanol versus gasoline in car engines have shown mixed results.

But backing biofuels typically is important for political success in the state, said Cary Covington, a political science professor at the University of Iowa.

“In the general election, Iowa’s largely Republican agricultural community is going to be less inclined to vote for a Democrat if they don’t support ethanol. It’s like, don’t poke the bear and give them a reason to be against you,” Covington said.

U.S. Senator Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts, who has made success in Iowa a priority and has climbed in the polls, stands out among top Democratic contenders as the most full-throated supporter of the state’s ethanol industry.

Touring an ethanol plant in Dyersville, Iowa, on Monday, she said renewables like corn ethanol, soy biodiesel and advanced biofuels “play an important role in our march toward independence from fossil fuels.”

U.S. Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont supported the RFS during the 2016 campaign. At least seven Democratic candidates have toured Iowa ethanol facilities, including former Texas congressman Beto O’Rourke and U.S. Senator Amy Klobuchar of corn-friendly Minnesota.

Tom Vilsack, a former Iowa governor and agriculture secretary under Obama, said the concerns over Biden’s ethanol bona fides were “unfounded.” He said the Obama administration was a friend of the biofuels industry on a number of fronts, including funding new infrastructure for higher ethanol blends of gasoline.

“I think to focus on one action and ignore all the good the Obama administration did for the biofuel industry is unfair,” said Vilsack, an informal adviser to a slew of Democratic candidates who want to better connect with rural Americans.

Monte Shaw, head of the Iowa Renewable Fuels Association, said it was true the Obama administration supported the biofuels industry. But he said he was aware of only one instance where Biden intervened on the issue, and that was to lower targets.

“If he was involved in more, we’d love to hear about it. The best thing he can do is come to Iowa, sit down with key players in the industry and explain what happened,” Shaw said.

(Reporting by Jarrett Renshaw; Editing by Colleen Jenkins and Peter Cooney)

What do you think?

9 pledges
Upvote Downvote
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
Jeff Kent
Jeff Kent

I get around 10% less miles per gallon with E10. I drove from A to B using a full tank of E10 and noted the MPG. At B I found gas without ethanol and filled the tank. When I got back to A I filled up and noted the MPG. There was almost a 10% difference in the same car, on the same day, in the same weather, in a flat area. Might be related to getting 10% less gas. I will always buy pure gas if it is within 15% of the same price. So at $3/gallon E10 pure… Read more »

Allen Zabel

Truth be told.
If we paid the actual cost of ethanol added gasoline?
We’d be paying over seven dollars a gallon.
The government subsidies, pay for the hidden costs.
This was just a government scheme, to inflate the price of corn.


If the IA farmers were smarter, they’d grow less corn (demand will up the prices) and/or sell it to countries like Mexico (which imports from us) or use it to fatten pork for sale to China (world’s #1 pork consumer) which is facing a YUGE shortfall since the swine flu epidemics.


Ethanol blends cheat consumers. Ethanol is nowhere near as energy dense as gasoline, so one literally gets less bang for the money.

Besides the dubious environmental results, there is also the energy, i.e. petroleum intensive, cost of growing the corn.

Let’s also remember the massive fertilizer runoff. The Mississippi and Missouri rivers flow through IA. See the article here on IJR about “dead zones” in the Gulf and the causes.

China Says It Will Respond if US Escalates Trade Tension

Trump Put Politics Aside to Wish ‘Tough’ Nadler Well During His Brief Hospitalization: Report