Red, Green and Blue: Ethanol: Fuel of the Future or Ponzi Scheme?
Shirley: Color me cynical, but when giant agribusinesses fall over one another in a rush to board the corn ethanol train, I tend to view the situation with something other than rose-colored glasses.
Outside of the juicy profits awaiting corporations like ADM thanks to the combination of U.S. farm subsidies and $60-plus-per-barrel sweet light crude, the ethanol frenzy offers more questions than answers. First, there is the questionable energy payback: some studies say ethanol yields more energy than it requires to produce ("The Energy Balance of Corn Ethanol: An Update"), while others say it's a net negative energy source ("Ethanol Fuel from Corn Faulted as 'Unsustainable Subsidized Food Burning'").
There are other concerns as well: more fuel-crop fields mean fewer forests, grasslands and natural ecosystems, higher agricultural water demands, higher food-and feed-crop prices, and more intensive monocropping on already severely depleted soils. Too many questions, too few answers.
A more responsible approach would be to immediately start jacking up fuel-efficiency standards ("Fuel Economy: The Single Most Effective Step for Cutting Oil Dependence") while investing in serious R & D for all alternative fuels and energy sources. Of course, that approach isn't a gravy train for corporate share-holders, so I won't be holding my breath.
Tags: alternative fuels, biofuels, corn, Ethanol, Red, Green and Blue, switchgrass, vegetable oil
- Uncategorized
June 15th, 2007 at 1:34 pm
You do have it out for big companies, don’t you Shirley?
That’s not where I’m investing these days. I think that old economies of scale enjoyed by the big guys are being replaced by cheap technologies where mom and pop can and are competing.
There’s not that big of an advantage to being a conglomerate anymore except in your political muscle. Business and farmers associations are taking care of that as well though.
Where things like computer muscle used to be a barrier to entry to many small businesses; now a half million dollars worth of main-frame computing from a decade ago is easily replaced by a desk-top computer and a copy of QuickBooks.
I’m predicting a diversified energy ethanol economy with no need or benefit to selling out to the ADMs either on behalf of the owners or to the ADMs themselves.
Note, too, the cellulosic technology is here now. The problem, again, is that it is at a disadvantage to gasoline and existing ethanol production because the new technology does not yet have the capital infrastructure in place and paid for.
June 15th, 2007 at 3:56 pm
btw, Shirley… did you see Clayton’s latest article on Biodiesel? Cool stuff.
June 15th, 2007 at 4:08 pm
Very interesting, though I agree with Clayton’s healthy skepticism regarding the wildly optimistic expectations. We’ve all seen plenty of instances of “breakthrough” fuels and power sources that have proven, over time, to not be the panaceas once promised.
Maybe algae biodiesel or cellulosic ethanol or some other fuel will provide us some breathing room in terms of our current dependence on fossil fuels, but — bottom line — I still believe it’s grossly irresponsible, both from an environmental standpoint and from a making-the-best-use-of-finite-resources standpoint, to not make serious efficiency (back to better CAFE standards!) and conservation efforts part of the equation.
June 15th, 2007 at 4:11 pm
Speaking of making the best use of finite resources, I'd be interested on your take on this article, Jimmy: "Pentagon as Global Gas Guzzler" (http://www.tomdispatch.com/post/174810/michael_klare_the_pentagon_as_global_gas_guzzler)
June 15th, 2007 at 4:48 pm
I really don’t want the army worried about the amount of fuel it consumes until it becomes a scarce resource that will affect its mission. In the mean time it’s the mission that’s most important.
Whyisit that you seem to think that positive change will come from only from standards imposed on us by government.
The more I read about nano-capacitor technology, though, that seems like it could be the recipe for basic commuter transportation with fast-recharge electric cars. We’ll just have to figure out how to sequester the CO2 from the inevitable coal-electric demand.
Who knows what the future brings but I’m less pessimistic about where we are now and more optimistic about innovation and the future.
Prudence probably lends to a more cautious view of the future; but history, I’d say, supports my position well.
June 19th, 2007 at 12:47 am
Dear Shirley:
About a month ago, construction began on a corn ethanol plant about one mile from my house. It is one of three being planned for the Marion, Ohio vicinity. At first, I thought it would be a good thing for the environment and local farmers. But, the more familiar I have become with the project, the more I think it’s going to bomb like pet rocks.
Besides the fact that it’s going to mess up the skyline with a bunch of tall grain bins and refining towers, they have to run a natural gas pipeline to a main about two miles away. It will run about forty feet in front of my house as well as across a river which will make a mess. This plant will consume a lot of natural gas to process the grain and distill the whiskey. (That’s basically what ethanol is.) The high pressure gas line is going to be buried about forty feet in front of my house. That’s uncomfortably close.
It will smell like a distillery with corn being cooked and fermented. There will be a drastic increase in truck and train traffic to support prodution. The ethanol plant will also waste a lot of heat which will be dumped into large ponds. It will occupy two hundred acres of prime farmland and there will always be a risk of spills damaging the environment, dust explosions and alcohol fires.
While it may initially help bring in some money for our school district, chances are good that the city of Marion will annex it like every other industry around here and our school will get nothing.
My biggest concern of all is the folly of sustainable corn alcohol for fuel. If the economy changes or the political winds shift, the ethanol subsidy could dry up and cause the plant to go bankrupt. Who will clean up the mess? Speaking of drying up, we’re experiencing a drought this year and, unless something extraordinary happens, the corn harvest will be much less than expected. Where will the plant get the corn it needs? I think this is a knee-jerk scheme by some investors hoping to make it big riding on public sentiment. In mean time, my environment is being ruined.
Regards,
Ardose