Corn Ethanol Does Not Add Up

By
Brian
on August 3, 2008 Comments (2)

Yes, ethanol can be very useful as fuel. It could reduce our consumption of gasoline. But corn ethanol isn't the answer. If we are to use biofuel, then we need to choose a more efficient type of ethanol.

Like this? Let us know with a $5 donation, so we can do more

Filed under: Fuel Efficiency | Renewable Energy

It is becoming more and more obvious that we need to move away from oil as a major source of fuel. The problem is that we are obviously and pathetically hooked on it. Nearly every middle-class American has considered taking the car to the corner store as opposed to walking. Although it is great that we've found a way to reduce oil consumption in cars with biofuels, we need to make sure that we're making the right decisions.

Corn ethanol, the biofuel receiving the most support from the U.S. government, is a bad substitute for gas. In fact, corn ethanol provides not more than a 3% reduction of greenhouse gas emissions, whereas sugar cane ethanol and celluslosic ethanol, respectively, provide a 50%-70% and more than 90% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions. As it turns out, corn ethanol is not very 'green.'

Yes, ethanol can be very useful as fuel. It could reduce our consumption of gasoline. Experts agree that ethanol is energy efficient. But corn ethanol isn't the answer. If we are to use biofuel, then we need to choose a more efficient type of ethanol. However, we need to choose wisely because with the help of biofuels food prices are soaring. Biofuels should only be a means to an end, not a permanent solution. The only way to create a system that can last is to eliminate the use of oil.

Categories:

2 Comments

Mat on November 22, 2010 4:55 PM
Good stuff, Brian. I think what is impeding our progress toward cleaner and renewable energies is largely the economic status quo—in particular the fact that this is how business for many large corporations has been done for some time, and to change something like that is both slow and costly. I think that if a significant change is to be seen, it will also be slow and costly; and most likely it will be the smaller companies that will do the leg work. To make the changes necessary for sugar cane growth for ethanol to our agricultural system, a lot of people would be… Let’s just say unhappy. I think one of the biggest hurdles that this change must overcome is that some of these unhappy parties are big players; corporations that lead economies and their leadership, who frequently also deal with government agencies like the EPA or FDA. In my opinion, there is basically no way around this for the corporations who control the agricultural industry or the energy industry. If you think about it, the reason these companies are making what they do from corn ethanol is largely because of the subsidy they have gotten the government to emplace for them. Instead the technologies and techniques will be adopted by smaller players, and eventually perhaps these will be acquired by those with the power to make significant changes to the system. But I really think the bottom line is that until those companies which are making money from corn ethanol start making the same from another source, no significant change will be seen.
Geoff Young on November 24, 2010 12:17 PM
In the article, the author points out the flaws of using ethanol as a substitute for gasoline. They make the argument that ethanol, while a substitute, only causes a 3% increase in emission cleanliness. It also causes an increase in food prices because of the increased consumption of corn. However what the author fails to mention is the environmental impact of switching from gasoline to ethanol. Growing corn is a renewable energy, as long as the ground is kept fertilized and the topsoil is drained of nutrients. Drilling for oil is not, and it also has long environmental impact (BP disaster). So while ethanol doesn’t cause a sharp decrease in greenhouse gas emissions, it does counter balance by having less environmental impact in the production of ethanol. The author argues that an increase in ethanol use may cause food shortages. However it has been the policy of the United States to produce 10x the amount of needed corn, and to destroy the rest of the crop. This ensures that there is never a shortage of corn, and by destroying the rest, they can dictate the prices. So instead of wasting the reserve, we can implement what’s left and turn it into fuel. While we would still have food shortages (because the level that we are at is still causing food shortages) they wouldn’t be any more noticeable than what we have grown accustomed to. We can also continue to research how to refine the ethanol process to minimize the amount of carbon emissions placed into our atmosphere. I feel that with the right amount of R/D we can find a solution to this problem. Not only do we have the means to make ethanol, we can employ more farmers and help bolster their profession. C’mon America, lets get some corn!

Subscribe by Email

Enter your email address:

Financing Innovation

Early Stage Innovation

Network Businesses

From the EMU Google Partnership

From our Bullpen

From the New Enterprise Forum