We need to move away from our massive consumption of fossil fuels, and from petroleum in particular. The pollution it creates endangers our survival. Oil dependence weakens the economy of the
There is a lot of talk about corn alcohol as a solution to our crisis.
Corn ethanol is a very flawed product. It in not a green product, as it adds pollution which worsens the climate crisis. The fossil fuels required to create corn ethanol – natural gas to make fertilizers, diesel for the tractors, and coal for electricity to distill it consume about as much energy as it produces. The main economic advantage is that (cheap and dirty coal) electric energy is turned into liquid energy for transportation.
If corn ethanol renders more energy than it takes to produce it, the gain is marginal, and most equations do not factor in the energy cost for producing the farm equipment, the distillation equipment and the transportation equipment. As for greenhouse gas pollution, corn ethanol is barely better than gasoline.
If the environmental costs; the soil degradation and compaction, the effects of pesticides, herbicides, fertilizers, are considered, there is a net loss. If lost opportunity cost from the diversion of food to fuel, and the increase cost of those commodities are considered, it again is a loss to the overall economy. If the impact on increase food and feeds costs is factored in, it is a sizable negative for our society.
Thus, corn ethanol is a defective solution to our energy needs, to the environment and to the economy of our nation.
Corn is not the right biomass product for energy production. It requires intensive agricultural practices. It is a monocropped annual which either uses bi-annual tillage resulting soil degradation or uses large amounts herbicides to control weeds. It demands use intensive use of fertilizers and insecticides. It requires high capital investment and maintenance of equipment. It does not produce as much biomass as other biofuel feedstock crops. It is not close to ideal, and is much less productive than other available crops.
Neither is ethanol an ideal biofuel. It does not work well in cold weather, it has a lower energy density than gasoline so cars need to be filled more often, and it is so volatile that considerable amounts are not burned by the vehicle, but rather just add to air pollution. The production of ethanol requires considerable energy in the distillation process because of its high water solubility. Mark Jacobson of
The main argument for subsidizing ethanol production was to get it kick started. It has been subsidized for about 30 years. If there was truly an economic market for ethanol, it would be easy enough to add the up to 10 percent ethanol (E10) to all U.S. gasoline vehicles can use. This would require no change to infrastructure, and consume about 14 billion gallons of ethanol a year. Certainly this is a sizable market for biofuels that would support farmers would.
Farmers are risk adverse and corn has a commodity market. If farmers grow a crop and there is no market, they may never recover. If an entrepreneur does a startup business and it fails, they can try again or get another job. If a farmer losses the farm, it is unlikely that they will ever get another opportunity. A farmer can grow corn, and be sure that there will be a market for the product, whether it is for ethanol or cornflakes. If switchgrass or sweet sorghum are grown, they may not be able to sell it. Sweet sorghum requires timely processing. If a processor is not ready when the crop is ready, the sugar content begins to fall. Corn can be stored. Until secure and widely available markets for biofuel crops are established – corn is safe for farmers. When the market is secure for biofuelstock, farmers will switch to more productive and profitable alternative crops. Additionally corn is highly subsidized.
A fleet of vehicles is currently on the road that can use E95 . Models of the V6 Ford Taurus have been available which can use E85 since 1994. Several design changes were needed to allow for cars to operate on alcohol fuels. Changes included the block material, exhaust valve seat inserts, wear resistant rings, alcohol-compatible fuel injectors specially designed for high flows, a stainless steel fuel system, and unique engine calibration for ethanol operation. Over 6 million vehicles from Dodge, Ford, and GM have been sold which can use E85 and Flex Fuel Ethanol-Gasoline mixtures and are currently on the road. The auto makers get a huge CAFE standard credit for making these Flex Fuel vehicles. Yet the demand is not there.
If as a nation we want to move to biofuels, cellulose based fuels make much more sense. Ethanol subsidies, gasoline subsidies, and corn subsidies should end. Indirect subsidies such as the cost of guarding the Persian Gulf should be added to the price of gasoline.
Subsidies cause perturbations in the market which support one energy source over another, but let politics rather than economics choose the best solution. Environmental impact taxes such as carbon tax can help move towards solutions which help preserve our environment.
Farmers will begin growing biofuels crops which make economic sense for their climate and soil conditions. Lower intensity farming may make economic sense and be less risky for farmers, while being better for the environment and better for wildlife. Biofuels can be rotation crops which allow the soil to rest and recover.
The risk in choosing the wrong biofuel is the risk of locking ourselves into the wrong infrastructure, which cannot be easily changed when a better technology develops. Ethanol is the wrong biofuel. If we are to go down the ethanol path we must be careful that the ethanol production facilities are designed so that they may be later converted to other products such as butanol or one of many other biofuels being or to be developed. Distribution facilities and auto makers should also keep the future of alternatives to ethanol in view. It is essential for success that biofuel technology be future proofed
The goal is not to preserve an unsustainable culture, but to open doors to new paradigms. We can have clean renewable energy. We can restore our aquifers. We can reforest and return land to grasslands. We can replenish wildlife. We can have energy independence. But none of this will occur on its own. It requires vision.
The short term cross-over argument of using corn ethanol to cellulose alcohol is a good one, except it has had 29 years to happen and hasn't... I'm having a hard time believing it.
2 comments:
How much Ethanol comes from outside of America? Does anyone have stats?
I own Mercedes, Rolls Royce’s and they do not perform well on Ethanol.
With a global economy do we really need US farmers anymore? The world is flat globalization have removed our manufactures base, why not farmers also?
Shalom,
--- Prof. Leland Milton Goldblatt, Ph.D.
http://drgoldblatt.blogspot.com/
Little ethanol is imported as there are import fees and subsidies for ethanol.
A list of vehicles that run on ethanol is hyperlinked in in the posting under the word vehicles. These vehicle should get better performance (acceleration) but poorer mileage with E85.
China is the worlds largest grain producer, but its yields peaked in 1997 and are falling with the depletion of its aquifers. We cannot depend on imports for our agricultural needs. Inexpensive food is based on inexpensive oil. With competition with biofuels, food prices will rise. This is why foresight into biofuel agriculture and its impact on food production, and its effects on the environment is essential.
Post a Comment