Another ethanol refiner hoisted a white flag this past week. Aventine Renewable Energy at Pekin filed for chapter 11 federal bankruptcy protection, and while it is not the first, nor the biggest, its financial challenges point to continued stress for an industry that had been on top of the world a year ago. Aventine joins VeraSun, the nation’s largest ethanol producer on the bankruptcy list, during a week that a half dozen of VeraSun’s old plants were sold to another ethanol refiner, Valero.
Of course, the larger ethanol companies are not the only ones having difficulty. Many smaller one and two plant operations have also sought bankruptcy protection in the past year following the plummet in crude oil futures in the latter part of 2008. No, they were not all caught speculating on the long side of the crude oil market, but caught in a cost-price squeeze. With ethanol prices linked at the hip to unleaded gasoline, what goes up must come down and ethanol prices fell below cost of production. At least the cost of production that had been booked by the plant’s corn buyers.
The ethanol industry that had been flying high in 2008 with $140 crude oil, and market analysts predicting $200 prices, ethanol refiners were locking in corn prices at higher prices to help push that commodity well past $7. When the crude oil balloon popped, and prices deflated with the rest of the global economy, ethanol prices had to fall as well and that destroyed any hope of profits, for companies that are solely dependent upon ethanol sales.
The result has been the closure of many ethanol plants, because there is no future in keeping open a plant that is losing money. That is something that cannot be made up on volume, no matter how large. One ethanol industry consultant currently estimates the industry will operate at only 67% of capacity through 2010. That compares to a nearly 100% capacity a year ago, with new plants opening every month.
That presents a significant conflict, with capacity diminishing at the same time the federal requirement for ethanol production to rise. During 2009-2010, the US Renewable Fuels Mandate calls for 12.6 billion gallons of ethanol to be blended into the nation’s fuel supply. If every ethanol plant was operating at maximum capacity, 14.5 billion gallons would be produced. With the industry moving at 67% of top speed, the mandate will not be reached without drawing upon any stocks that might exist or relying upon imported ethanol. The latter would not be politically favorable to the corn and ethanol industry, but would also tack on a tariff that raises the price of ethanol. That is the downside for the motorist.
The downside for agriculture is significant, and will only serve to delay any economic recovery. That is because the courts have allowed VeraSun to walk away from its commitments to purchase corn at previously agreed prices, and successor companies do not have to comply with those commitments either. Thousands of Cornbelt farmers who sold millions of bushels of corn to VeraSun are not being paid, if they have already delivered the corn. In addition, they are required to deliver corn to the new operators of the plants, at whatever price the new operator determines the market to be. Unfortunately, today’s cash corn prices are just half of what they were when the contracts were signed last year.
While there is absolutely no indication of similar events occurring in the case of Aventine, and there are no financial problems being reported by either ADM’s or Tate & Lyle’s ethanol operations, the current ethanol economy has radically changed from 2008, and that has filtered back into the farm economy keeping corn prices and farm profitability under pressure.
RSS feed for comments on this post.
Line and paragraph breaks automatic, e-mail address never displayed, HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>

Its about time the ethanol industry stood on its own two legs without any government subsidies? The industry was cooked up back in the 1970’s and was to be a propped up with a TEMPORARY government subsidy. It has been 40 years and enough is enough!
Comment by popeye
— April 13, 2009 @ 12:14 pm
Well there, Popeye. In case you haven’t noticed, you’ve been running ethanol in Your tank for nearly the past 15-18 years lowering the price at the pump 18-34 cents. And by the way, the ethanol plants weren’t getting the assistance….it was the blenders. The ethanol industry will continue to make a huge impact on Your day to day life, so as to your comments…”enough is enough”
Comment by Gale Cunningham
— April 13, 2009 @ 4:17 pm
Like i said eliminate the subsidy and let it stand on its own. I have no problem with the ethanol industry but its time the industry(blend credit)was removed. TEMPORARY i guess means forever? I would like you to cite studies showing the 18-34 cent savings along with what it costs the government(taxpayer) for this TEMPORARY subsidy.
Comment by popeye
— April 14, 2009 @ 8:10 am
Gale are you related to the corn-based ethanol industry in some way shape or form??? And what if we got rid of the 54 cent import tariff, would the savings at the pump to the consumer increase or decrease???
Besides contributing to food inflation by using corn that would otherwise go to the dinner table (remember 2007-2008?), Brazil is clearly the most efficient producer of ethanol. Besides (and Gale correct me if I’m wrong) I believe that for US corn-based ethanol, we get 1.5 units of energy from the 1.0 used to create it while for Brazilian sugar-based ethanol, the ratio is 3.0 to 1.0.
Enough of this crap, its time to change policy and as popeye said, allow the industry to stand on its own two feet!
Comment by GabeD
— April 14, 2009 @ 4:26 pm
I use my name, not a pin name. I farmed for many years and retain ownership of the farm today. Actually the newest of technology in ehtanol is nearly 2.5-3.0 to l.0 in energy. The most recent study indicates that it WASN”T ethanol that caused the price of food. “temporary” is just that…….I’ll remind you that the Food Stamp program was “temporary” as well. See the orginal draft document. I’d say in either case, the American farmer will produce enough for you little “sillies” won’t starve. The studies are numerous that point the direction of the 18-34 cent savings at the pump. You don’t need to take my word for it. The crap is of those thinking that corn-based ethanol will solve the problem. We know it will not do that……..but I’d not complain with you fuel tank full (From foriegn oil) and your mouth full.
Comment by Gale Cunningham
— April 20, 2009 @ 11:41 am