Surplus corn was seen across the Midwest in recent years, due to the US dependence on the grain. In 2007 it reached all time highs as farmers cashed in on the biofuel opportunities. But what was that all about anyway?Anyone who drove through the Midwest last year couldn't help but to see that corn was growing everywhere. Acres were devoted to it far from the corn belt up near Traverse City, it was on every available acre that anyone could sow. The price was up and people were feeling good about helping global warming and the fuel, dare I say, crisis?
But what was going on here? It seems that everyone I spoke to who knew anything about corn, fuel, and the politics of biofuel, said the same thing. NO GO. And now the research is saying the same. Despite some supportive analysis, people are finding that those who knew what they were talking about, really did know. There are several interrelated issues with depending on corn for our future fuel.
For example, have you noticed the price of food lately? Have you any idea how much of our food is dependent on corn? (Read The Omnivore's Dilemma for a great analysis) More corn (27% in 2007, versus 20% in 2006) is being used to create ethanol. That means less is available, and supply and demand dictates that the price of corn will rise, as it did, and so did our food.
But there are now several references (this is the link to the Science article) to that fact that ethanol is not helping one of the main reasons we are moving in that direction - global warming is not reduced by using ethanol. Land use changes have released more carbon dioxide into the air. Unbroken soil is a great sequester of CO2. Oh yes, and since corn is a thirsty crop, it is straining already tenuous water supplies.
The studies continue on saying that there are better ways to convert fields to biofuel, better crops, and maybe even using less water. Corn uses a lot of water, and the varieties grown today are hybrids, dependent on fossil fuel based fertilizers.
But how did we get into this crazed mode last year when everything was coming up corn? Politics, in a word. Agriculture and farmers have been suffering over the past few decades, and anything that looks like profit will be followed by those who depend on subsidies in order to break even. The agricultural lobby LOVED the idea of more corn, and high prices, and pushed it on the farmers, and they bit without analyzing the economic and environmental costs. As it turned out it ended up costing the consumers higher food prices, and the environment with more global warming. Subjectively the farmers are always looking for something, anything, to make a profit. Agriculture is a rough and tumble industry. Farmers are played by the political forces, and objectivity (what is actually good for the people) is never really broached.
When will we learn to be objective? I thought that was what science was supposed to be all about. It is time to leave politics behind and begin find the best form of energy, and to learn conservation too. There are ways to be energy rich and be efficient too. We just have to buckle down and work. We are not entitled, we are responsible.
PS I am adding this on March 29. Just saw the new Time Magazine and corn and biofuels are on the cover. The clean energy myth.
But what was going on here? It seems that everyone I spoke to who knew anything about corn, fuel, and the politics of biofuel, said the same thing. NO GO. And now the research is saying the same. Despite some supportive analysis, people are finding that those who knew what they were talking about, really did know. There are several interrelated issues with depending on corn for our future fuel.
For example, have you noticed the price of food lately? Have you any idea how much of our food is dependent on corn? (Read The Omnivore's Dilemma for a great analysis) More corn (27% in 2007, versus 20% in 2006) is being used to create ethanol. That means less is available, and supply and demand dictates that the price of corn will rise, as it did, and so did our food.
But there are now several references (this is the link to the Science article) to that fact that ethanol is not helping one of the main reasons we are moving in that direction - global warming is not reduced by using ethanol. Land use changes have released more carbon dioxide into the air. Unbroken soil is a great sequester of CO2. Oh yes, and since corn is a thirsty crop, it is straining already tenuous water supplies.
One of the new studies, however, found that due to the impact of plowing up new fields, corn-based ethanol nearly doubles greenhouse-gas emissions compared to gasoline and that fuels made from switchgrass increase emissions by about 50 percent. Not all biofuels were net losers, though. The study authors suggested that producing biofuels from waste products still makes sense. (Grist)
The studies continue on saying that there are better ways to convert fields to biofuel, better crops, and maybe even using less water. Corn uses a lot of water, and the varieties grown today are hybrids, dependent on fossil fuel based fertilizers.
But how did we get into this crazed mode last year when everything was coming up corn? Politics, in a word. Agriculture and farmers have been suffering over the past few decades, and anything that looks like profit will be followed by those who depend on subsidies in order to break even. The agricultural lobby LOVED the idea of more corn, and high prices, and pushed it on the farmers, and they bit without analyzing the economic and environmental costs. As it turned out it ended up costing the consumers higher food prices, and the environment with more global warming. Subjectively the farmers are always looking for something, anything, to make a profit. Agriculture is a rough and tumble industry. Farmers are played by the political forces, and objectivity (what is actually good for the people) is never really broached.
When will we learn to be objective? I thought that was what science was supposed to be all about. It is time to leave politics behind and begin find the best form of energy, and to learn conservation too. There are ways to be energy rich and be efficient too. We just have to buckle down and work. We are not entitled, we are responsible.
PS I am adding this on March 29. Just saw the new Time Magazine and corn and biofuels are on the cover. The clean energy myth.
15 comments:
I never really understood where the whole ethanol boom was headed, but it seems it may be coming to an end in it short lived journey. I seen at gas stations around town that provided ethanol available for fill up that the costs where never substantially lower, maybe by a few cents in some cases. So when I decided to do some reading about it, I discovered that that although it costs the same, the mpg where less than regular fuels. So not only after reading this article did I learn that it doesn’t help the environment, it really doesn’t benefit us as well. The crop is a thirsty crop and requires a lot of water; also it takes away from our corn supple that in the U.S. we use a lot of corn in everything we consume. Another interesting thing is that the article said that we though ethanol would be helping the environment, instead we are actually accelerating global warming with the use of ethanol. So where does it go from here?
It seems like people got so excited about the possibility of a new energy source that wasn't a fossil fuel, they just threw resources and money into before really doing their homework. It's a good idea in theory and I guess it's a positive that people are thinking about other energy sources but the corn craze was definitely misguided. I've definitely noticed the price of food going especially things like milk. I went to the Hostess outlet a week ago and they had signs saying that they were sorry about the price increases, but they had no choice because the cost of ingredients had gone up so much because of all this emphasis on corn. We're wasting precious water, losing out corn resources to ethanol as well as converting fields of other crops into corn and where has it gotten us? Pretty much nowhere. Hopefully at least this will facilitate conversations about other sources such as wind, solar and nuclear power that need to be had if nothing else.
Erin Mitchell Geog 320 T 5:30-8:10
Well there goes that idea. I have said before that we need to be on the forefront and not just caving in on the latest craze. I have seen that there were other methods of production that were more efficient than corn anyway. That is one of the big concerns with going green. Where were these facts when the corn craze was at its peak. When trying to go green everything is so new to everyone. What is good today may be bad tomorrow. You make a change here several things change there. Another issue that is consistant in going green is that when things happen they happen politically. When things happen politically there is often BIG BUCKS behind it. Nothing gets the wheels in motion in the government like BIG BUCKS. But where the big bucks lay is not always the best way.
Although corn isn't working out, at least we tried. People got excited about the possibility of getting away from oil a little and helping the environment at the same time, so although its not working it doesn't mean we're not looking in the right direction. It's a pattern in American history that whenever corn doesn't work out people turn to wheat. I've never heard anything about wheat providing energy, but I think the water demands arn't as bad as corn and it's less picky about its environment... plus you don't get racoons all over the place. I've recently been hearing about energy derived from organic material (mostly plant) breaking down. The natural biological processes that transform life into dirt release quite a bit of energy I guess! So maybe we could grow lots of wheat, put it in a big pile, and watch it create energy? ...it might not be the best idea, but like I said earlier, at least we'd be trying.
I think the ethanol idea was not very well thought out. How could anyone (in big gov't) not see this coming? All of the OTHER effects of producing all of this corn for fuel. Instead of rushing into the next best thing to reduce our dependancy on foriegn oil we should have considered all of the side effects of this process. Maybe waiting to invest all of that money into something that would make more sense would have been a better idea. Food prices rising ahh no big deal, using more water that the entire world needs, wasting millions or possibly bilions of dollars that this economy desperatly needs,and creating more problems with the environment due to this bust is a tragedy.
Ryan MCMullen GEOG 320
It seems to be ironic that the ethanol boom is starting to look like an ethanol bust. I have been aware for some time that to make ethanol use use a large amount of fossil fuel and a lot of corn is required. Ethanol is a noble idea but it is really not practical due to the increases corn consumption which has lead to a rise in food prices. Gasoline one, new age fuels nothing, bring it on science!!Bring it on!!
Michigan is getting hit the hardest with the economy being so low, so I do understand to a certain extent why these people took such a leap in the direction of corn. Just like the article said about how anything that looks like it may arrise a profit certain people need to take that dare. On the other hand though, the research which should have gone into a leap such as that obviously did not take place. If the research would have been done then there would have been an understanding of how food prices were going to go up. Now, sure these people might have been making a little bit more money, but in the long run everyone is suffering. How is that a good thing? It's not obviously. Not only that, but the water that is required to grow corn is outrageous, and that waste for our food prices to go up just doesn't seem worth it to me. Days now, though, I guess people aren't looking at what's best for the whole, it's what's best for themselves. I truely believe that selfishness is the core problem within all of these areas.
I think people had the right idea about trying to find alternatives, this one just did not work out. There were too many other uses and needs for corn than just burning it. My family has really had to deal with the rising cost of corn because we have several sheep and goats. We used to feed them cracked corn all winter because it was so cheap. Now, it is so expensive that we have to mix other grains with the corn to keep the cost down. We view our animals as pets, but now my dad is thinking about getting rid of them because the cost to feed them keeps increasing. I just don't think that people looked far enought into the idea of using corn for fuel. Hopefully the next new alternative will not take our food supply away.
Josh Drozdowski GEOG 320 online
I am not very confident in the future of the objectivity of the American people. The mass moves with trends and trends are often set by the media. The media in turn is control by so few hands that the flow of information that the public receives is often skewed in a very bias direction. I agree whole heartedly that leaving the politics behind and doing what is best for the American people would be ideal but I don't see it happening any time soon with the virtual monopolies like ADM in control of such a large sector of the agribusiness industry. This coupled with the unconstitutional level of influence that lobbysists have on politicians only serves to further harm the greater good. The "green" trend is promising and hopefully it filters into on overall lifestyle for more people. The educated people who do know what they are talking about need to keep up the fight and those of us who are interested need to keep learning what we can in order to make more educated lifetstyle decisions.
Josh Drozdowski GEOG 320
Peoples desire to find alternatives to foreign fossil fuels I am sure started off with altruistic motives, but it has unfortunatley been skewed by those seeking to exploit it for more profit. It was the right idea, but now that there is significant evidence against the benefits to corn ethanol new alternatives need to be supported.
The recent studies are showing that biofuels are releasing more greenhouse gases than they are saving. This may be due to multiple variables, one being that fertilizer in farming is effecting it. This in turn is accelerating the effects of global warming on the farming industry, even more so than that of other fossil fuels. The biofuels that are being used for farming are destructive in that they are harming the carbon sinks. This allows for the relocation of other farming. It is imperative that we turn to natural vegetation and regeneration in order to cut back on the contribution to global warming. The accelerating climate change is adding to the deforestation, destruction and depletion of the crops and lands that we rely on.
I have learned about the corn being used as an alternative fuel in a class presentation by another student last year. It was hard to believe something that you eat can be turned into something to power. However, I do not recall the presentation discussing the effects of ethanol on global warming and knowing this it is better that we stay away from something that is going to contribute to the ever existing problem rather than be a solution. The concept was a great idea, however, the negative impact it would have is unacceptable. We can continue to our efforts to strive at efficency in the manner of helping out the global warming situation. The impact of global warming is a problem that does need to be ignored and we must continue the efforts that some are lobbying for in order to make it effective stop to it. At the intital time of this effort, the farmers jumped right on board to make sure that they were ready and this would seem like a great idea to anybody to make more money. Corn prices went up making all of their crops that much more valuable. Now that we know of the results of using this alternative energy source, we are changing efforts in order to find new greener approaches that will help solve our problem of the overconsumption and abuse of the natural resources that create the fuel we use.
Kyle Seay
Online Geography 320
Post a Comment