Study Says Corn-Based Ethanol 24% More Carbon Intensive Than Gasoline (generation, dollars, economic)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
the ethanol requirement never made much sense to me..
Quote:
Initially reported by Reuters, this research paper indicates that the carbon intensity of corn-based ethanol is "likely at least 24% higher" than conventional gasoline, not a promising figure. This study investigates the use of land and water resources in the US during eight years of the government's Renewable Fuel Standard program, from 2008 to 2016.
According to this research, the Renewable Fuel Standard program increased demand for corn, which boosted its cultivation by 8.7% and the use of fertilizer by up to 8%. This degraded ecosystem carbon stocks and resulted in more nitrate leaching, greater phosphorus runoff and increased soil erosion, but that's not all. Researchers estimate the RFS also increased corn prices by a whopping 30% and the costs of other crops by 20%.
Does anything the left promote make sense? Consider those electric vehicles they love... Where does the energy for the vehicle come from? Almost certainly a power plant that produces a considerable amount of pollution. The exhaust is basically just coming out of a different pipe. But there is a lot of money to be made in the "green energy" sector since the government pumps it full of money.
Does anything the left promote make sense? Consider those electric vehicles they love... Where does the energy for the vehicle come from? Almost certainly a power plant that produces a considerable amount of pollution. The exhaust is basically just coming out of a different pipe. But there is a lot of money to be made in the "green energy" sector since the government pumps it full of money.
The Energy Policy Act of 2005 that stuck all that ethanol in our fuel was bi-partisan and signed by Bush.
11,070 power plants in the US. A lot easier to retrofit those with better pollution controls or even swap the generation method than it is to do that with our 287 million cars.
The Energy Policy Act of 2005 that stuck all that ethanol in our fuel was bi-partisan and signed by Bush.
11,070 power plants in the US. A lot easier to retrofit those with better pollution controls or even swap the generation method than it is to do that with our 287 million cars.
So you're saying lefties supported it. I personally have never heard anyone on the left say we need to stop using ethanol from corn in our fuel but I have heard many people on the right claim it is wasteful and counterproductive and needs to stop.
Let's not be blaming the "left" for ethanol. It's been a bipartisan handout to rural America where the corn is raised and the ethanol produced. No president has had the political will to stop this ridiculous farm welfare scheme.
Let's not be blaming the "left" for ethanol. It's been a bipartisan handout to rural America where the corn is raised and the ethanol produced. No president has had the political will to stop this ridiculous farm welfare.
It's not a handout and it's definitely not welfare since they have to work for it. That's just a partisan attack to disparage rural communities and farmers, who are typically conservative, and we know how you feel about those pesky hard working undesirables...
Many US corporations actually do receive handouts for nothing at all. Some farmers do receive payment for not producing crops. That is closer to welfare/a handout.
So you're saying lefties supported it. I personally have never heard anyone on the left say we need to stop using ethanol from corn in our fuel but I have heard many people on the right claim it is wasteful and counterproductive and needs to stop.
Odd.
I've heard plenty of lefties in opposition to it because it drove up food prices as there was a dramatic shift in farming for ethanol. And righties love it because it supports the rural farm vote with effectively another subsidy.
It's not a handout since they have to work for it. That's just a partisan attack to smear rural communities which are typically conservative, and we know how you feel about those pesky hard working undesirables...
"They" is mostly gigantic agri-businesses. Yes, they work hard (at sopping up taxpayer dollars they, in turn, avoid paying).
The whole ethanol is further proof of how absolutely ridiculous and 100% corrupt the US government is. It is all about corruption, nothing to do with the environment. It amazes me that anyone listens to anything the government says ever.
Using food-stuffs as fuel was always an amazingly stupid idea top to bottom.........lots of direct and indirect problems, bad economics etc.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
