| Each year in early october my
grandfather summoned my entire
family to come to his farm and
harvest potatoes. hunched over on
all fours, each person quietly
filled their buckets with these
"earth apples." each year
he used a different field for his
crop. one year he would plant
potatoes, the next year beets or
wheat. the potato replaced the
grain diet on the european
continent. it became survival food,
especially during the two world
wars. dumplings, potato salad and
mashed potatoes are only a few
potato dishes found in a long list
in the european cuisine. the easy
adaptability of the potato to grow
almost anywhere in the world can
produce an annual crop of 322
million tons of potatoes. many
african countries greatly benefit
from growing the potatoes because
they make them more self-sufficient
in their food production.
in the age of nation building,
stamping out of global warming, and
driving for energy
self-sufficiency, the new state
appointed rival of the potato is
maize, which is better known as
corn – the yellow cob-born grain
used in the production of ethanol
fuel. as a blend with gasoline,
biofuel powers automobiles and farm
equipment. its environmental
friendly side effect is to reduce
greenhouse gases, and some say it
is the key to everlasting energy
security in the future.
ethanol fuel production received
its first stimulus after the arab
oil crisis in 1973. during 1978 the
us federal government sealed the
project with the energy tax act
authorizing tax exemptions by
blending gasoline with 10 percent
ethanol. a floodgate of free money
opened up for farmers and ethanol
producers as the energy and
agricultural departments spent
billions of dollars on subsidies.
this year’s estimates are between
$5.5 billion to $7.3 billion of our
tax dollars to be handed out to
corn growers.
the incentives for farmers to grow
corn in the us is not to meet the
needs of a market that entails a
healthy profit. instead, they plant
corn because they get paid to do so
by a federal government interested
in ethanol production. and as it
turns out, producing ethanol is an
expensive process. archer daniels
midland corporation (adm) out of
illinois, one of the largest
producers of ethanol, received as
much as $10 billion in subsidies
between 1980 through 1997 along
with favorable tax breaks costing
taxpayers an average of $30 for
every dollar adm earns in profits.
add to that the $500 of federal and
state subsidies it takes to reduce
one metric ton of co2-equivalent,
one can literarily say that it is
governments who heat up the globe
by burning cash.
this year corn production has
already increased by 15 percent
over last year. even president
bush, not a green lover but excited
about ethanol, is expecting that
farmers will plant 90.5 millions of
acres of corn in 2007 in order to
meet the demands of ethanol
production of 132 billion liters by
2017. corn prices already went up
by 50 percent. the average price
per bushel of $1.95, which had held
steady over the past eight years,
jumped up to $3.05 in january of
this year, and is expected to rise
as high as $3.40.
corn is feedstock. it is consumed
not only by humans but also by
hogs, chickens and cattle. the
drastic side-effect of higher corn
prices is now reflected in the
higher prices in the grocery store.
the price of food went up 3.9
percent last year – faster than
the inflation rate, which ranges
around 2.7 in 2007. in particular,
pork, beef, milk, eggs and poultry
show drastic increases in their
prices. so do fruits and
vegetables. considering that most
people spend an average of 10
percent of their disposable income
on food, higher prices in grocery
reduces the spending on cars, homes
or clothing. health nazis should
also be concerned, since these
higher prices drive people to
cheaper processed foods that add to
increased health risks in the poor
segment of the population.
the us federal government’s
targeted goal is to replace
gasoline with corn-based fuel as an
alternative energy source. this has
caught the attention of poorer
countries. mexico, for example, is
gradually replacing agave, a
spiky-leaved, large plant which
grows on high and arid land and
takes eight years to reach
maturity, with corn. agave is the
main ingredient for tequila. mexico
produced 25 to 35 percent less
agave this year and farmers take
less care of their agave crop in
favor of higher corn prices. the
world food program (wfp), which
recently stated that it can no
longer feed the poor due to the
impact of biofuel demand on food
prices, is foolishly encouraging
african and latin american
countries to take advantage of the
rising demand of biofuels by
planting corn; a popular world
practice that is now devastating
900 million of the world’s
poorest which rely on the un
feeding program.
it is quite clear that the
state-inflated demand for corn is
causing a global imbalance in food
production. farmers are replacing a
variety of vegetables and fruits
with corn due to the higher
profit-per-acre corn brings. the
two-year practice of crop rotation
for corn drains the soil and
requires more fertilizers on the
following soybean crop. the
additional cost ends up with the
consumer. as food prices rise, it
is the poor who suffer most from
this inflated demand for biofuel.
it is a burden that most people
cannot afford as inflation keeps
rising because of irresponsible
spending and government debt.
the federal budget for the fiscal
year beginning this october called
for $2.9 trillion dollars in
government spending. it includes
increases for all the various
cabinet-level departments. among
them were a 5.4 percent increase
for the department of energy and
3.6 percent increase for
agriculture. according to richard
m. ebeling, president of the
freeman, the average us household
would have to shell out
approximately $25,845 in taxes to
cover the budget. include with it
the us federal government’s
pre-existing liabilities of several
trillion, and the average us
household would have to pay an
additional $31,000 a year for 75
years to pay off the debt already
incurred by government spending.
how can an average income household
cover the basic needs such as food,
clothing, and shelter when tax
burdens already devour the wages of
a lower income population? poor
people only become poorer as
spending continues.
republican presidential candidate
dr. ron paul seems to be the only
congressional member who
understands the global effects of
subsidies. during his second
presidential debate the question
came up about oil profits. his
response was: "i don’t think
the profits are the issue. the
profits are okay if they’re
legitimately earned in a free
market. what i object to are
subsidies to big corporations when
we subsidize them and give them
r&d (research &
development) money. i don’t think
that should be that way. they
should take it out of the funds
that they earn..."
here lies the answer to many of the
energy questions. let the private
sector find a solution to new
energy sources. already technology
advances at a rapid speed and its
products remain ultimately
competitive on the market where
prices drop and become affordable
to the average consumer. just think
of recent changes from vcrs and
phonograph records to dvd’s and
cd players, and the addition of
cell phones and portable computers
to modern life. all are now
available at reasonable prices to
low-income households. industry
continually comes up with new
inventions that contribute highly
to communication, organization and
entertainment. the only sectors
that remain high in cost with
outrageous prices are sectors that
are under government regulation and
control: health care, medicine,
education, housing, and now food
prices. it would be a life-saving
act of mercy to close these various
departments of government, if
people want to have a future for
the next generation.
the trouble caused on the global
market by the federal
government’s sponsored ethanol
industry increasingly outweighs the
good it does. the idea of
sacrificing food production in the
name of biofuel as a future source
of energy is an irrational concept.
the consequence of higher food
prices due to corn production
hasn’t come from consumer choice
but from government coercion. if
the demand for energy is
increasing, and biofuel is the
answer, then where will the world
grow its food? the big believers in
a government supported biofuel
industry might have to prepare for
another big tsunami to hit the
shores of third world countries and
at home if this insanity isn’t
stopped. just don’t blame
capitalism if and when it comes.
july 21, 2007
sabine barnhart
Ethanol fuel is ethanol (ethyl alcohol), the same type of alcohol found in alcoholic beverages. It can be used as a fuel, mainly as a biofuel alternative to gasoline, and is widely used in cars in Brazil. Because it is cheap, easy to manufacture and process, and can be made from very common materials, such as corn, it is steadily becoming a highly respected and researched alternative to gasoline throughout much of the world.
Anhydrous ethanol, that is, ethanol with at most 1% water, the same alcohol as found in alcoholic beverages, can be blended with gasoline in varying quantities up to pure ethanol (E100), and most spark-ignited gasoline style engines will operate well with mixtures of 10% ethanol (E10).[1] Most cars on the road today in the U.S. can run on blends of up to 10% ethanol,[2] and the use of 10% ethanol gasoline is mandated in some cities where harmful levels of auto emissions are possible.[3]
Ethanol can be mass-produced by fermentation of sugar or by hydration of ethylene from petroleum and other sources. Current interest in ethanol mainly lies in bio-ethanol, produced from the starch or sugar in a wide variety of crops, but there has been considerable debate about how useful bio-ethanol will be in replacing fossil fuels in vehicles. Concerns relate to the large amount of arable land required for crops,[4] as well as the energy and pollution balance of the whole cycle of ethanol production.[5][6] Recent developments with cellulosic ethanol production and commercialization may allay some of these concerns.[7]
According to the International Energy Agency, cellulosic ethanol could allow ethanol fuels to play a much bigger role in the future than previously thought.[8] Cellulosic ethanol can be made from plant matter composed primarily of inedible cellulose fibers that form the stems and branches of most plants. Dedicated energy crops, such as switchgrass, are also promising cellulose sources that can be produced in many regions of the United States.[9]
In the U.S., there is potential to expand the market for ethanol fuels beyond the farm states where they have been most popular to date. Flex-fuel vehicles are assisting in this transition because they allow drivers to choose different fuels based on price and availability. The Energy Policy Act of 2005, which calls for 7.5 billion US gallons of biofuels to be used annually by 2012, should also help to expand the U.S. marketThe top five ethanol producers in 2005 were Brazil (4.35 billion US gallons per year), the United States (4.3 billion US gallons per year), China (530 MMgy), the European Union (250 MMgy) and India (80 MMgy). Brazil and the United States accounted for 90 percent of all ethanol production. Also, it should be noted that the United States, now producing at a rate of about 4.6 billion US gallons per year, is widely considered the world’s largest ethanol producer. Strong incentives, coupled with other industry development initiatives, are giving rise to fledgling ethanol industries in countries such as Thailand, the Philippines, Columbia, the Dominican Republic and Malawi. Nevertheless, ethanol hasn't yet made much of a dent in world oil consumption.[32]
[edit] Brazil
Main article: Ethanol fuel in Brazil
Gasoline on the left, alcohol on the right at a filling station in BrazilBrazil has one of the largest bio-fuel programs in the world, involving production of ethanol fuel from sugar cane, and ethanol now provides 18 percent of the country's automotive fuel. As a result of this, together with the exploitation of domestic deep water oil sources, Brazil, which years ago had to import a large share of the petroleum needed for domestic consumption, recently reached complete self-sufficiency in oil.[33][34][35]
Brazil produced around 16.4 billion liters of ethanol in 2004 and used 2.7 million hectares of land area for this production (4.5% of the Brazilian land area used for crop production in 2005[36]). Of this, around 12.4 billion liters were produced as fuel for ethanol-powered vehicles in the domestic market. In Brazil, ethanol-powered and flexible-fuel vehicles are manufactured for operation with hydrated ethanol, an azeotrope of ethanol (around 93% v/v) and water (7%).
Production and use of ethanol has been stimulated through: (1) low-interest loans for the construction of ethanol distilleries; (2) guaranteed purchase of ethanol by the state-owned oil company at a reasonable price; (3) retail pricing of neat ethanol so it is competitive if not slightly favorable to the gasoline-ethanol blend; and (4) tax incentives provided during the 1980s to stimulate the purchase of neat ethanol vehicles.[37]
Guaranteed purchase and price regulation were ended some years ago, with relatively positive results. In addition to these other policies, ethanol producers in the state of Sao Paulo established a research and technology transfer center that has been effective in improving sugar cane and ethanol yields.[38]
[edit] United States
A Ford Taurus "fueled by clean burning ethanol" owned by New York City.Main article: Ethanol fuel in the United States
Most cars on the road today in the U.S. can run on blends of up to 10% ethanol, and motor vehicle manufacturers already produce vehicles designed to run on much higher ethanol blends. Ford, DaimlerChrysler, and GM are among the automobile companies that sell “flexible-fuel” cars, trucks, and minivans that can use gasoline and ethanol blends ranging from pure gasoline up to 85% ethanol (E85). By mid-2006, there were approximately six million E85-compatible vehicles on U.S. roads.[39]
There is potential to expand the market for ethanol fuels beyond the farm states where they have been most popular to date. Flex-fuel vehicles are assisting in this transition because they allow drivers to choose different fuels based on price and availability. The Energy Policy Act of 2005, which calls for 7.5 billion US gallons of biofuels to be used annually by 2012, should also help to expand the U.S. market.[40]
It should also be noted that the growing ethanol and biodiesel industries are providing jobs in plant construction, operations, and maintenance, mostly in rural communities. According to the Renewable Fuels Association, the ethanol industry created almost 154,000 U.S. jobs in 2005 alone, boosting household income by $5.7 billion. It also contributed about $3.5 billion in tax revenues at the local, state, and federal levels.[41]
[edit] Sweden
Main article: Ethanol fuel in Sweden
All Swedish gas stations are required by an act of parliament to offer at least one alternative fuel, and every fifth car in Stockholm now drives at least partially on alternative fuels, mostly ethanol.[42]
Stockholm will introduce a fleet of Swedish-made electric hybrid buses in its public transport system on a trial basis in 2008. These buses will use ethanol-powered internal-combustion engines and electric motors. The vehicles’ diesel engines will use ethanol.[43]
[edit] Australia
Main article: Ethanol fuel in Australia
Legislation imposes a 10% cap on the concentration of fuel ethanol blends. Blends of 90% unleaded petrol and 10% fuel ethanol are commonly referred to as E10. E10 is available through service stations operating under the BP, Caltex, Shell and United brands as well as those of a number of smaller independents. Not surprisingly, E10 is most widely available closer to the sources of production in Queensland and New South Wales. E10 is most commonly blended with 91 RON "regular unleaded" fuel. There is a requirement that retailers label blends containing fuel ethanol on the dispenser.
[edit] China
China is promoting ethanol-based fuel on a pilot basis in five cities in its central and northeastern region, a move designed to create a new market for its surplus grain and reduce consumption of petroleum. The cities include Zhengzhou, Luoyang and Nanyang in central China's Henan province, and Harbin and Zhaodong in Heilongjiang province, northeast China. Under the program, Henan will promote ethanol-based fuel across the province by the end of this year. Officials say the move is of great importance in helping to stabilize grain prices, raise farmers' income and reducing petrol- induced air pollution.[44]
[edit] Environment
[edit] Energy balance
Main article: Ethanol fuel energy balance
All biomass needs to go through some of these steps: it needs to be grown, collected, dried, fermented and burned. All of these steps require resources and an infrastructure.
Opponents of corn ethanol production in the U.S. often quote the 2005 paper [45] of David Pimentel, a retired Entomologist, and Tadeusz Patzek, a Geological Engineer from Berkeley. Both have been exceptionally critical of ethanol and other biofuels. Their studies contend that ethanol, and biofuels in general, are "energy negative", meaning they take more energy to produce than is contained in the final product.
A 2006 report by the U.S. Department Agriculture compared the methodologies used by a number of researchers on this subject and found that the majority of research showed that the energy balance for ethanol is positive. In fact, a large number of recent studies, including a 2006 article[46] in the prestigious journal Science offer the consensus opinion that fuels like ethanol are energy positive. Furthermore, it should be pointed out that fossil fuels also require significant energy inputs which have seldom been accounted for in the past.
It is also important to note that ethanol is not the only product created during production, and the energy content of the by-products must also be considered. Corn is typically 66% starch and the remaining 33% is not fermented. This unfermented component is called distillers grain, which is high in fats and proteins, and makes good animal feed. [47]
In Brazil where sugar cane is used, the yield is higher, and conversion to ethanol is somewhat more energy efficient than corn.[14] Recent developments with cellulosic ethanol production may improve yields even further.[48]
[edit] Air pollution
Compared with conventional unleaded gasoline, ethanol is a particulate-free burning fuel source that combusts cleanly with oxygen to form carbon dioxide and water. The Clean Air Act requires the addition of oxygenates to reduce carbon monoxide emissions in the United States. The additive MTBE is currently being phased out due to ground water contamination, hence ethanol becomes an attractive alternative additive.
Use of ethanol, produced from current (2006) methods, emits a similar net amount of carbon dioxide but less carbon monoxide than gasoline.[49] If all bioethanol-production energy came from non-fossil sources the use of bioethanol as a fuel would add no greenhouse gas.[50]
[edit] Manufacture
In 2002 , monitoring of ethanol plants revealed that they released VOCs (volatile organic compounds) at a higher rate than had previously been disclosed.[51] The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) subsequently reached settlement with Archer Daniels Midland and Cargill, two of the largest producers of ethanol, to reduce emission of these VOCs. VOCs are produced when fermented corn mash is dried for sale as a supplement for livestock feed. Devices known as thermal oxidizers or catalytic oxidizers can be attached to the plants to burn off the hazardous gases. Smog causing pollutants are also increased by using ethanol fuel in comparison to gasoline.
[edit] Greenhouse gas abatement
Corn ethanol has received much support on environmental grounds primarily because of its role in reducing greenhouse gas emissions. However, the evidence for this claim is mixed.
A recent ten-year forecast of ethanol production by the USDA places 2017 corn ethanol production at 12 billion US gallons and growing at only 2% per year. This estimate, together with a parameter publishing in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS), indicates that this near-maximum level of ethanol production will abate GHG emissions by 0.13% (~1/10 of 1%) of current US GHG emissions. However, this does not hold for all greenhouse gases. Another study has suggested that replacement of 100% petroleum fuel with E85 (a fuel mixture comprised of 85% ethanol and 15% petroleum) would significantly increase ozone levels, thereby increasing photochemical smog and aggravating medical problems such as asthma.[19][20]
This value reflects increases in corn area and the use of 30% of the corn crop for ethanol. It also apparently takes into account anticipated improvements in corn yields and ethanol production. The PNAS value is a 12% reduction in greenhouse gas emission relative to the "net emissions of production and combustion of an energetically equivalent amount of gasoline."
The January 2006 Science article from UC Berkeley's ERG, estimated this parameter to be 13% after reviewing a large number of studies. However, in a correction to that article releases shortly after publication, they reduce the estimated value to 7.4%. None of the other values needed to complete the calculation are controversial.
GREET model maintained by Argonne National Labs in Chicago has produced a series of publications on GHG abatement through ethanol. The latest of the studies is [21]
[edit] Land use
Large-scale 'energy farming', necessary to produce agricultural alcohol, requires substantial amounts of cultivated land. Some have claimed that land is acquired through deforestation, while others have observed that areas currently supporting forests are usually not suitable for growing any sort of crops.[52][53] Related concerns have been raised regarding a decline in soil fertility due to reduction of organic matter[54], a decrease in water availability and quality, an increase in the use of pesticides and fertilizers, and potential dislocation of local communities.[55]
As demand for ethanol fuel increases, food crops are replaced by fuel crops, driving food supply down and food prices up. Growing demand for ethanol in the United States has increased corn prices by 50% in Mexico.[56] Average barley prices in the United States rose 17% from January to June 2007 to the highest in 11 years. Prices for all grain crops trend upward, reflecting a progressive increase in farm land devoted to corn for the production of produce ethanol fuel.[57] Prices for U.S. corn-based products, including animal feed, also rise. This translates to higher prices for animal products like chicken, beef, and cheese. June 2007 cheese prices rose to $2 per pound on average, increasing 65% over the same period in 2006. As milk prices in the United States, approached $4.00 per US gallon, [58] many American restaurant franchises announced price increases for their products to compensate for rising food costs.[59] [60] [61]
Alternatively, cellulosic ethanol can be produced from any plant material, potentially doubling yields, in an effort to minimize conflict between food needs versus fuel needs.[62] Instead of utilizing only the starch bi-products from grinding wheat and other crops, cellulosic ethanol production maximizes the use of all plant materials, including gluten. This approach would have a smaller carbon footprint because the amount of energy-intensive fertilisers and fungicides remain the same for higher output of usable material.[63] While the enzyme technology[64] for producing cellulosic ethanol is currently in developmental stages, it is not expected to be available for large-scale production in the near future.[65] Moreover, the production of ethanol for fuel raises a number of land scarcity issues, regardless of what production method is employed. Many analysts suggest that biofuel strategies must be accompanied by fuel conservation restrictions. [66]
[edit] Renewable resource
Ethanol is considered "renewable" because it is primarily the result of conversion of the sun's energy into usable energy. Creation of ethanol starts with photosynthesis causing the feedstocks such as switchgrass, sugar cane, or corn to grow. These feedstocks are processed into ethanol (see production).
The environmental and economic benefits of non-cellulosic ethanol - including corn ethanol - have been heavily critiqued by many, including Brad Ewing of Environmental Economics & Sustainable Development[67] and Lester R. Brown of Earth Policy Institute.[68] The main criticism dwells on the increasing costs of corn for food as the demand for ethanol production increases. It remains to be seen [vague] if ethanol production can overcome these problems.
Current, first generation processes for the production of ethanol from corn use only a small part of the corn plant: the corn kernels are taken from the corn plant and only the starch, which represents about 50% of the dry kernel mass, is transformed into ethanol. Two types of second generation processes are under development. The first type uses enzymes to convert the plant cellulose into ethanol while the second type uses pyrolysis to convert the whole plant to either a liquid bio-oil or a syngas. Second generation processes can also be used with plants such as grasses, wood or agricultural waste material such as straw.
[edit] Replacement of petroleum
Only about 5% of the fossil energy required to produce ethanol from corn in the United States is obtained from non-US petroleum.[69] Current (2006) United States production methods obtain the rest of the fossil energy from domestic coal and natural gas. Even if the energy balance were negative, US production involves mostly domestic fuels such as natural gas and coal so the need for non-US petroleum would be reduced. Developed regions like the United States and Europe, and increasingly the developing nations of Asia, mainly India and China, consume much more petroleum and natural gas than they extract from their territory, becoming dependent upon foreign suppliers as a resultThe science of Economics is generally defined as the study of scarcity management. Absent scarcity and alternative uses of available resources, there is no economic problem. As such, the subject of economics involves the study of choices as they are affected by incentives and resources.[70] Since land and agriculture have historically served the world as utilities for food production, many believe the alternative use of agricultural resources for ethanol fuel production imposes an artificial scarcity of food on a global scale.[71] [72] [73] [74]
Meanwhile, the United States Department of Energy, finds that for every unit of energy put towards ethanol production, 1.3 units are returned.[75] Another study found that corn-grain ethanol produced 1.25 units of energy per unit put in.[76] As yields improve or different feedstocks are introduced, ethanol production may become more economically feasible in the US. Currently, research on improving ethanol yields from each unit of corn is underway using biotechnology. By utilizing hybrids designed specifically with higher extractable starch levels, the energy balance is dramatically improved. Also, as long as oil prices remain high, the economical use of other feedstocks, such as cellulose, become viable. By-products such as straw or wood chips can be converted to ethanol. Fast growing species like switchgrass can be grown on land not suitable for other cash crops and yield high levels of ethanol per unit areaCritics argue that ethanol is a fancy way of using solar power. The processing and production, as well as burning of ethanol would not significantly improve carbon emissions over the current use of gasoline. Instead, critics propose the widespread adoption of battery electric vehicles (zero emissions vehicles) combined with increased use of nuclear power and solar power.
[edit] Problems
Fuels with more than 10% ethanol are not compatible with some fuel system components.[81][82]
Examples of extreme corrosion of ferrous components,[82] and internal separation of portions of rubber fuel tanks have been observed in some vehicles using ethanol fuels.[citation needed]
Formation of salt deposits, jelly-like deposits on fuel strainer screens
Can negatively affect electric fuel pumps by increasing internal wear[82] and undesirable spark generation. [83]
Is not compatible with capacitance fuel level gauging indicators and may cause erroneous fuel quantity indications in vehicles that employ that system.[84]
Not always compatible with marine craft, especially those that use fiberglass tanks.[85][86]
Decreases fuel-economy by 15-30%; this can be avoided using certain modifications that would, however, render the engine inoperable on regular petrol without the addition of an adjustable ECU, or use of multiple ECUs to run the engine on multiple fuel types. [87][20]
Support for biofuels could keep petroleum prices high in the USA (NY Times - [27])
Tough materials are required to overcome ethanol's corrosive nature, and the high compression ratio needed to make an ethanol engine as efficient as it would be on petrol; these would be similar to those used in diesel engines (which typically run at a CR of 20:1[88], versus about 8-12:1 for petrol engines [89].) Diesel engines cost significantly more than similar-sized ordinary petrol engines as a result of the more advanced materials used in their construction.
Whether the energy balance of ethanol - that is, whether the fuel contains more energy than was used to produce it - is positive or negative is debatable [90][91], as is whether or not the land used to grow the crop was obtained by, say, chopping down a rainforest, in which case the ethanol produced is just as unenvironmentally-friendly as fossil fuel due to the carbon released by the dead plants. [92] |
Advertisement 
0 
In 
