Round and Round We Go: Is Corn-Based Ethanol Viable?
by Jeremy Elton Jacquot, Los Angeles on 06. 8.07
Over at The Oil Drum, Gail has just penned an exhaustive and, we think, invaluable post clarifying the perceived benefits and disadvantages of using corn-based ethanol as an alternative to fossil fuels. While we've already touched on this issue at length several times in the past (see here and here for some recent posts), we thought this post in particular would provide a perfect springboard for further discussion.
One common misperception is that most of the corn ethanol produced is used as E85 (85% ethanol/15% gasoline mixture). In fact, as Gail explains, the vast majority of corn ethanol is actually used as a fuel additive for two simple reasons: E85 isn't very popular and MTBE (methyl tertiary-butyl ether), the substance previously used as an additive, is being phased out for health liability concerns. Having said that, however, she is quick to point out that E85 is not a perfect substitute for MTBE in several respects.
Another important question she takes on is the extent to which corn-based ethanol production could be increased. Currently, about 20% of the corn produced in the U.S. is used to make ethanol, and she estimates that, under the best scenarios, this amount could be tripled to the equivalent of 60% of the 2006 corn production. At this level, ethanol would still replace only approximately 10% of the volume of gasoline used, and it is questionable whether we would ever want to shift so much of our corn production to ethanol. Indeed, an article in Popular Science cites a study by the Center for Agricultural and Rural Development at Iowa State University that predicts that U.S. ethanol production could consume more than half of corn, wheat and coarse grains by 2012, ratcheting up food prices and potentially causing massive shortages.
What about ethanol's oft-vaunted effect on curbing greenhouse gas emissions? As Gail notes, this is far from the truth: "This simplistic model is not correct for the production of corn-based ethanol because fossil fuels are used in the growing of corn and the production of ethanol, and these contribute to global warming gasses. Nitrogen used in fertilizer also tends to produce nitrous oxide, which is 300 times as potent a global warming gas as carbon dioxide."
In fact, secondary impacts precipitated by an increase in U.S. corn production, such as further deforestation in countries like Brazil to increase the production of soybeans, would likely tend to increase greenhouse gas emissions. And let's not forget some of the harmful biological and environmental impacts incurred by a shift to more ethanol production: huge use of water, increased soil erosion, more fertilizer use and more herbicide/pesticide use.
Two studies, one conducted by the Congressional Research Service for Congress and the other by the United Nations, both urge caution in expanding the production of biofuels because of the uncertainty surrounding possible side-effects. The Congressional Research Service report, which scrutinized corn-based ethanol, raised concerns that weather could have a significant impact on the variability of supply.
So is there a silver lining to using corn-based ethanol? Not really: even if more cost-effective approaches are adopted to make ethanol (increase renewable energy use and lower consumption of natural gas and coal in the process), it's not clear yet whether these will have a drastic impact on the total amount produced. Furthermore, whether the production of ethanol can be greatly expanded without causing more harmful secondary impacts is in doubt.
We've only just skimmed the surface here, so we heartily recommend you check out the rest of Gail's post if you're interested in this issue. Also please feel free to weigh in with your recommendations and/or concerns about the increased production of corn-based ethanol. We'd love to hear your comments!
Via ::Corn-Based Ethanol: Is This a Solution?, ::Refining 101: Summer Gasoline, ::Is America Headed for a Food Shortage?, ::Springtime for Ethanol
See also: ::Food Fight: Is Corn Food or Fuel?, ::Final Word on Ethanol's Efficiency as Vehicle Fuel, ::Not All Ethanol is Created Equal, ::Corn Demand from Ethanol Distilleries Vastly Understated, ::They Can Have their Cellulose and Digest it Too
Doesn't the production of corn ethanol consume about the same amount of fossil fuel it is meant to substitute? I mean I want it to work more than anyone, but it just doesn't seem efficient at all unlike sugar cane ethanol.
I'm glad that you're bringing attention to this important topic. From what I've read, corn-based ethanol is a very poor substitute for conventional gasoline, for efficiency and pollution reasons. The reason that the government has cuddled up to it so rapidly (while it disdains most other renewable energy projects) is that it essentially amounts to yet another corn subsidy. I'm more optimistic about bio-diesel, but this all just goes to show that we cannot progress toward sustainability without reducing the amount of energy we consume, regardless of the form it comes in.
In related news, high corn prices driven by demand for ethanol has made it less cost-effective for livestock farmers to use corn as feed. They are relying more heavily on defective human food, like trail mix and sugary cereals. Check out the story here:
http://online.wsj.com/public/article/SB117971270570109153-zOC0IHWiWPWox_jaHb4rBiWVpIo_20070528.html?mod=blogs
This doesn't bode especially well for the future of livestock in this counry. Cows weren't designed to eat corn, and they certainly weren't designed to eat candy. Yet another indication of the perverse attitude with which we treat our farm animals. Not only have they been reduced to meat bags, but garbage disposals too.
If you're interested in buying your meat from small farmers who let their animals roam free in the fields (and don't feed them candy, or corn), check out www.eatwellguide.org. Just put in your zip code and it'll tell you (for free!) all the stores, restaurants, and farms near you that are committed to sustainable and humane practices. Don't support factory farms!
Best,
- Andrew, of the Eat Welll Guide
Holy schlamoly! Check out how much taxpayers are going to pay for ethanol in the future ($131 billion through 2022!):
http://www.farmpolicy.com/?p=344
-Andrew, of the Eat Well Guide
I know we need to stop burning fossil fuels, but maybe burning up topsoil instead is a "bad" idea?
Corn may not have been the best choice to be used for Ethanol production. And expanding the use of corn for this purpose will affect the ways we use corn. On the other hand, there are other crops that can be used to produce Ethanol; potatoes, sugar beets and sorghum all contain more sugar than corn and could be exploited. In fact sweet potatoes, sorghum and millet will be used in a Canadian plant and rice in a Japanese plant.
Cellulosic Ethanol is on the horizon. It promises Ethanol from forest waste ( branches & brush ), industrial waste ( paper & saw dust ), agriculture waste ( corn husk, grain stalks & rice hulls ) and inedible crops ( switchgrass, hemp & kenaf ). The inedible crops can be grown on unimproved land without fertilizers or herbicides.
In the United States Ethanol will be made from many sources.
Ethanol is not as clean as I would like it to be but it is much cleaner than oil and certainly cleaner than coal. It is also carbon neutral.
Ethanol is not the answer but it is part of the answer. While Hydrogen Fuel Cells are a much better answer, today fuel cells are not affordable. Forty percent of our oil is used for transportation. Ethanol, hybrid vehicles and other gas mileage improvements will begin the process of weaning us off oil while research is working to bring down the cost of fuel cells.
In the future I expect to see the waste from crops used to produce Ethanol also converted to Ethanol by using the Cellulosic method. And I would not be surprised to see Ethanol added to bio-diesel for uses in trucks, trains, ships and the generation of electricity.