Comments on: Farm economy revs up ethanol-fueled engines

Ethanol backers envision nationwide corn fields churning out the main ingredient to the cleaner-burning fuel additive.

[ajbright]

Wrong sort of Ethanol

The Brazilian pursuit of ethanol is not based on corn, but sugar. The reason is that sugar-based ethanol is 5-7 times more efficient in terms of the energy required to produce fuel and the efficiency of that fuel when put against corn-based ethanol.

The reason the US isn't interested in sugar-based ethanol is that the corn (farming) lobby is more powerful (richer) than the sugar plantation lobby (if such a lobby exists, which it probably does).

This is the crux of American politics. The best ideas, and most rational arguments, ie. those that are best for the people congressmen/women are supposed to serve do not get traction because they are at odds with various lobbyist groups.

Not all lobbying is bad, though this is mostly by accident rather than intent. Often opponents to a crazy idea are just not as rich as proponents. Sometimes the opposite is true, but not often.

Usually the interests of business are not those of the people, but ironically when they are, their lobbyists are on the losing side in the battle for purchase of congressmen.

So while it is possible to produce an ethanol based fuel that makes economic and environmental sense to produce, the US Congress will naturally choose the version that in it's production and efficiency is no better for the environment than oil, and will introduce the exact same problems as oil in terms of cost of fuel and availability of product to the consumer.

[maxwis]

But We Already Have A Plantation Congress!

According to Senator Hillarity we already have a plantation Congress, so getting them to think about sugar based ethanol should be a slam dunk.

[richardeholder]

And let us not forget other farm-based fuel sources

If you can produce ethanol from corn and cellulose in the future, add that to methane from cow and dairy farms, the farmer/rancher can both feed and fuel us, and put money back into our own economy instead of less friendly sources.

[RavingEniac]

ethanol not feasible

There are two reasons why corn ethanol isn't viable as a fuel. 1) Corn prices are low because it's being grown by irrigation that can't continue indefinitely. The Ogallalah Aquifer of the Plains states is being sucked dry to grow corn. Each year the water table goes down, each year the water takes more energy to pump, and this can't continue. Ethanol from corn isn't renewable because the water to grow it isn't renewable. Besides, gasoline and diesel are used to grow it too, maybe more energy input than one can get from the resulting ethanol.

[Mister C]

Dam (pun) You Are Correct!

This is not only the case in the mid-west but in California as well.

The right wing nut-bags love to bash Paul Ehrlichs' "The Population Bomb" as their favorite example of Liberal (newspeak for anyone that dares contradict the party line) over-reaction.

What Ehrlich did not see was the tripling of production per acre due to the hugh increase in pesticide and fertilizer usage which requires intense irrigation. This results in water being removed from the underground aquifers faster then it can be replaced. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see where this will end up.

But that's OK cause the profits are here today, let someone else worry about tomorrow.

Ehrlich had no way of knowing how long we could postpone the events he predicted and grossly underestimated how big they will be when it finally happens!

I guess the nut-bags are right, Ehrlich did get it wrong, at least for now. :)

[guillermo_alv]

Brazil, have you herd about Global Warming?

"There's plenty of capacity to make food," Andreas said, noting that "hundreds of millions of acres of land in Brazil" could be developed into farmland.
As far as I know the only "hundreds of millions of acres of land in Brazil" are under the Amazon forest, and of course you can find a very few millions that are not part of the Amazon forest, but not as many as hundreds.
As my way of thinking, then you want to keep on the already alarming process of deforest of the Brazilian Amazon?
If the Amazon forest is being cripled, because somebody can't drive a car in some place of the world, is that OK?
Sorry but the Amazon already is having enough problems to survive as for you to put more problems on the Amazon's back.
The Amazon is not a very rich land is only great for the forest, but once that you cut the trees and burn the rest, there is not much left, than land for some years of cultives and after that it will be a dessesrt if they don't do something at the end of the land productive process.