Eco Facts vs Fish Tales

Is corn-based ethanol is the “green fuel” of the future?

Boris: Here’s a fact that you can share around the mud cooler: “If all the automobiles in the United States were fueled with 100% ethanol, a total of about 97% of U.S. land area would be needed to grow the corn feedstock".

Corn would cover nearly the total land area of the United States,” David Pimentel, professor in the College of Agriculture and Life Sciences at Cornell University.

The U.S., indeed, would literally be children of the corn.

“Abusing our precious croplands to grow corn for an energy-inefficient process that yields low-grade automobile fuel amounts to unsustainable, subsidized food burning,” Pimentel, continued. Dr. Pimentel chaired a U.S. Department of Energy panel that investigated the energetics, economics and environmental aspects of ethanol production several years ago, subsequently conducted a detailed analysis of the corn-to-car fuel process.
Among his findings:

• 70% more energy is required to produce ethanol than the energy that actually is in ethanol. So every time you make 1 gallon of ethanol, there is a net energy loss of 54,000 Btu.
• Producing ethanol from corn costs about $1.74/gallon vs. 95 cents to produce a gallon of gasoline. "That helps explain why fossil fuels -- not ethanol -- are used to produce ethanol," Pimentel said. "The growers and processors can't afford to burn ethanol to make ethanol. U.S. drivers couldn't afford it either, if it weren't for government subsidies to artificially lower the price."
• Most economic analyses of corn-to-ethanol production overlook the costs of environmental damages, which Pimentel says should add another 23 cents per gallon. "Corn production in the U.S. erodes soil about 12 times faster than the soil can be reformed, and irrigating corn mines groundwater 25 percent faster than the natural recharge rate of ground water. The environmental system in which corn is being produced is being rapidly degraded. Corn should not be considered a renewable resource for ethanol energy production, especially when human food is being converted into ethanol," Pimentel said.
• The approximately $1 billion a year in current federal and state subsidies (mainly to large corporations) for ethanol production are not the only costs to consumers, the Cornell scientist observes. Subsidized corn results in higher prices for meat, milk and eggs because about 70 percent of corn grain is fed to livestock and poultry in the United States. Increasing ethanol production would further inflate corn prices, Pimentel said, noting: "In addition to paying tax dollars for ethanol subsidies, consumers would be paying significantly higher food prices in the marketplace."

Net take-away: Fish Tale! Corn-based ethanol is not cheap or green.

Good news, however: Ethanol made from sugar cane shows great promise. It produces far more energy than is needed to grow it, and developing countries with tropical climates could prosper by producing sugar ethanol—the key watch out is to ensure that its production does not encroach on rain forests. The prospects also look good for cellulosic ethanol made from cellulose-rich feedstocks such as wood, grasses and agricultural wastes. That is still some way off.

Boris’ advice: Focus the debate on math that actually works. Raise your bristles with your congressmen about your tax dollars subsidizing bad (corn) ethanol. As boars and consumers, demand that our industries and governments work smarter. As my great grandma used to say: “Willful waste makes woeful want” (Scottish Proverb)

Sources: Economist Newspaper Ltd.; Cornell Chronicle