ESL Basics

ESL Lesson 1
Oil in Our Every Day Life

ESL Lesson 2
The History of Mining

ESL Lesson 3
Economic growth

ESL Lesson 4
Delivery Systems

ESL Lesson 5
Cities and Population Movement

ESL Lesson 6
Recycling

ESL Lesson 7
Rubber

ESL Lesson 8
Farming

Grain Ethanol

Key questions on energy options

Is the energy source sustainable?
Not sustainable.

What are the potential negative externalities (effects) of producing/using this energy source?
Again, many potential negative externalities. Among them are loss of topsoil, increased pollution from pesticide and herbicide runoff, aquifer depletion, and an increase in food prices due to increased grain demand [a positive externality (effect) for those who farm].

What is the EROEI?
The energy return on grain ethanol is very low. Published studies put this number at around 1.3, but the return for fossil fuels in (used in production) and ethanol out (amount gained during production) averages less than 1.1. Animal feed byproduct that is given a BTU value pushes the EROEI up to 1.3. Therefore, for 1 BTU of energy expended, less than 1.1 BTUs of ethanol can be produced, along with an additional 0.2 BTUs of animal feed. The net is then 0.3 BTUs with the byproduct credit, or about 1/17th of the fossil fuel net.

Is it affordable?
It is affordable, due to direct subsidies. But based on the current spot price (daily world price) of ethanol, it is slightly (a little bit more) over twice the cost of regular unleaded gasoline on a BTU equivalent basis.

Are there better alternatives?
Yes. Even staying within the ethanol category, there are better choices.

Are there other special considerations?
The business of grain ethanol has revitalized (renewed and re-energized) many rural communities, and has made farming much more profitable. However, it also encourages farmers to plant corn instead of less environmentally harmful crops. The fossil fuel inputs into ethanol production are also largely non-liquid (natural gas). In the case of natural gas, this makes a fine transportation fuel.

In summary, are the advantages of the source large enough to justify any negative consequences?
No.

Grain ethanol is not sustainable for primarily two reasons. First, it involves a loss of topsoil, and in many areas a depletion (emptying out) of ground water aquifers. The amount of topsoil loss has been subject (put to) to much debate, but it will vary (be different) based on many factors (pieces of information). The other concern is the large amount of fossil fuels usage required for grain ethanol production. This means that in addition to the direct negative externalities, you can add secondary (2nd) negative externalities caused by the usage of the fossil fuels to continue the cycle of planting, plowing, harvesting the corn.

The pollution issue, in my opinion, is quite serious but is typically (usually) ignored (not talked about) by ethanol boosters (advocates). This issue of pollution caused by corn farming: Modern corn hybrids require more nitrogen fertilizer, herbicides, and insecticides than any other crop, while causing the most extensive (wide spread) erosion of top soil. Pesticide and fertilizer runoff from the vast expanses of corn in the U.S. prairies (flatland areas) bleed (seep/get into) into groundwater and rivers as far as the Gulf of Mexico. To understand the hidden costs of corn-based ethanol requires factoring in (also including) "the huge, monstrous (gigantic) costs of cleaning up polluted water in the Mississippi River area and also trying to remedy (fix or stop) the negative effects of poisoning the Gulf of Mexico,"

"Corn farming substantially tops all crops in total application (total amount) of pesticides, according to the US Department of Agriculture, and is the crop most likely to leach (slowly seep into) pesticides into drinking water.” says Tad Patzek of the University of California's Civil and Environmental Engineering department.

While banned by the European Union, Atrazine is the most heavily used herbicide in the United States - primarily (mostly) applied to (put on) cornfields - and the EPA rates it as the second (2nd) most common pesticide in drinking wells. The EPA has set maximum safe levels of Atrazine in drinking water at 3 parts per billion, (3 parts per 1,000,000,000) but scientists with the U.S. Geological Survey have found up to 224 parts per billion in Midwestern streams and 2,300 parts per billion in Corn Belt irrigation reservoirs.

In my opinion, these are negative externalities just as serious as those posed by fossil fuel usage. Yet this is the alternative that we are scaling up (starting up) just as fast as we possibly can. The real problem is that the negative externalities don't directly and immediately impact (affect) most people's lives, so they pay no attention to them. Sure, increased ethanol production might cause Atrazine levels in drinking wells to increase, but it's in someone else's water. "It's not my problem if it's not in my water" is the attitude of most people. But I doubt anyone personally affected by this is going to consider it an acceptable externality.

DISTILLERY DEMAND FOR GRAIN TO FUEL CARS VASTLY UNDERSTATED
Lester R. Brown January 4, 2007
http://www.earth-policy.org/Updates/2007/Update63.htm
Because of inadequate (insufficient) data collection on the number of new ethanol plants under construction, the quantity (amount) of grain that will be needed for fuel ethanol distilleries has been vastly (greatly) understated. Farmers, feeders, food processors, ethanol investors, and grain-importing countries are basing (making) decisions on incomplete data. The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) projects that distilleries will require only 60 million tons of corn from the 2008 harvest. But here at the Earth Policy Institute (EPI), we estimate that distilleries will need 139 million tons-more than twice as much. If the EPI estimate is at all close to the mark, the emerging (beginning) competition between cars and people for grain will likely drive (push) world grain prices to levels never seen before. The key questions are: How high will grain prices rise? When will the crunch come? And what will be the worldwide effect of rising food prices? USDA relies heavily on the Renewable Fuels Association (RFA), a trade group, for data on ethanol distilleries under construction, but the RFA data have lagged (fallen) behind movement in the industry. We drew on (used information from) four firms that collect and publish data on U.S. ethanol distilleries under construction. RFA is the one most frequently cited. The other three firms are Europe-based F.O. Licht, the publisher of World Ethanol and Bio-fuels Report; BBI International, which publishes Ethanol Producer Magazine; and the American Coalition for Ethanol (ACE), publisher of Ethanol Today.

Unfortunately, the lists of plants under construction maintained by RFA, BBI, and ACE are not complete. Each contains some plants that are not on the other lists. Drawing on these three lists and on biweekly reports from F.O. Licht, EPI has compiled a more complete master list. For example, while we show 79 plants under construction, RFA lists 62 plants. This list can be viewed at www.earthpolicy.org/Updates/2007/Update63_data.htm

According to the EPI compilation, the 116 plants in production on December 31, 2006, were using 53 million tons of grain per year, while the 79 plants under construction-mostly larger facilities-will use 51 million tons of grain when they come online. Expansions of 11 existing plants will use another 8 million tons of grain (1 ton of corn = 39.4 bushels = 110 gallons of ethanol). The grain it takes to fill a 25-gallon tank with ethanol just once will feed one person for a whole year.

In addition, easily 200 ethanol plants were in the planning stage at the end of 2006. If these translate into construction starts between January 1 and June 30, 2007, at the same rate that plants did during the final six months of 2006, then an additional 3 billion gallons of capacity requiring 27 million more tons of grain will likely come online by September 1, 2008, the start of the 2008 harvest year. This raises the corn needed for distilleries to 139 million tons, half the 2008 harvest projected by USDA. This would yield nearly 15 billion gallons of ethanol, satisfying 6 percent of U.S. auto fuel needs. [And this estimate does not include any plants started after June 30, 2007, that would be finished in time to draw on (use) the 2008 harvest.]

This unprecedented (never before happened) diversion of the world's leading grain crop to the production of fuel will affect food prices everywhere. As the world corn price rises, so too do those of wheat and rice. Consumer substitution (replacement) among grains, and the same crops compete for the same land.

Continue to: Sugarcane Ethanol

TOP

ESL Lesson 7

............................................................
Rubber
............................................................
Bio-fuels and Ethanol
............................................................
Liquid Fossil Fuels
............................................................
Grain Ethanol
............................................................
Sugarcane Ethanol
............................................................
Cellulosic Ethanol
............................................................
Biodiesel
............................................................
Biomass Gasification
............................................................
Wind and Solar
............................................................
Conservation
............................................................