Follow this blog:
RSS

EPA could curb corn ethanol requirement in gasoline

By | October 15, 2012, 3:00 AM PDT

If this summer’s drought and its toll on crops weren’t enough, it may also impede some of this country’s efforts to move away from fossil fuel.

As recently as a few months ago, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) was working to promote the use of more ethanol in the country’s gasoline supply. In light of the drought, however, concerns over corn shortage may actually force the agency to push for less ethanol use in gasoline.

Lawmakers and governors of eight states that produce corn have asked the EPA to reduce ethanol requirements from the current plan - which, according to a 2007 law, would require that 15.2 billions of gallons of ethanol be used this year, with that amount doubling by 2022.

But the U.S. Department of Agriculture yesterday predicted that the country’s farm grain output will fall by 5.4 percent — the lowest levels in 39 years. Additionally, barely one quarter of the U.S. corn crop yields are in “good” or “excellent” condition, compared with 70 percent last year.

The EPA is expected to make its decision regarding the corn ethanol levels early next month.

While certainly a blow for those hoping to see America reduce its reliance on fossil fuels, the issue speaks to a frequent criticism of the U.S.’ corn ethanol program - that it diverts crops from the food supply, making the market more susceptible to food shortages and price increases.

Photo: Flickr/Wayne Truong

via [NBCNews.com]

Start your week smarter with our weekly e-mail newsletter. It's your cheat sheet for good ideas. Get it.

Channtal Fleischfresser

About Channtal Fleischfresser

Channtal Fleischfresser is a contributing editor for SmartPlanet.

Channtal Fleischfresser

Channtal Fleischfresser

Contributing Editor

Channtal Fleischfresser has worked for The Economist, WNET/Channel 13, Al Jazeera English, Wall Street Journal and Associated Press. She holds degrees from the University of Pennsylvania and the Columbia University Graduate School of Journalism. She is based in New York.

Follow her on Twitter.

Channtal Fleischfresser

Channtal Fleischfresser

Channtal does not have financial holdings that would influence how or what she covers.

She writes for SmartPlanet and is not an employee of CBS.

If you liked this, don't miss...
12
Comments

Join the conversation!

Follow via:
RSS
+4 Votes
+ -
Again proving my point...
...that once you combine bad policy with subsidies, it is impossible to ever get rid of it. And the myths that support those policies are equally impossible to get rid of. Myths like:

Eliminating ethanol mandates "...may also impede some of this countrys efforts to move away from fossil fuel."

Nonsense! We actually consume more fossil fuels making ethanol (in growing, harvesting, and processing it) than we ever get back in ethanol, which is itself an even less efficient fuel.

Even Al Gore now publicly (at least overseas) admits that our ethanol policy is a tragic mistake, and that he only supported it because he needed to buy the votes. If you won't listen to Al Gore, who will you listen to? The corn lobby?
Posted by JohnMcGrew@...
Updated - 15th Oct
+3 Votes
+ -
Ethanol production increases greenhouse gases
To back up what JohnMcGrew says, take a look at "Use of U.S. Croplands for Biofuels Increases Greenhouse Gases Through Emissions from Land-Use Change" in Science magazine, 29 February 2008 (https://www.sciencemag.org/content/319/5867/1238.abstract ).
Posted by zackers
15th Oct
+3 Votes
+ -
broken link
I couldn't get the link to work with httpS, but it works fine without it: http://www.sciencemag.org/content/319/5867/1238.abstract.
Posted by Day Dreamer
15th Oct
+5 Votes
+ -
So, let's see...
...a fuel that:

a) Is much more expensive.
b) Is harmful to engines not designed to accept it.
c) Cannot be stored for long periods of time. (Another rude surprise to Volt owners)
d) Is more difficult to transport.
e) Actually lowers mileage.
f) Increases harmful emissions and CO2.
g) Competes with food uses and other crops, making food more expensive.
h) Requires as much use of fossil fuels as it supposedly replaces.
i) Increases demand for other limited resources, like fertilizer and water.

And the ironically named "SmartPlanet" thinks we need more of it.
Posted by JohnMcGrew@...
Updated - 15th Oct
+5 Votes
+ -
A little late, but good that they might do something.
The idea of using food for fuel has been a stupid policy from day one. All it has done is drive up the cost of both while hurting fuel economy.

Because of the bad corn crop this move would likely have little impact on food prices, but seeing that enthanol is more expensive to make per gallon than gasoline the average consumer should see the price of gas at the pump drop slightly, but we all know it will never happen.

At least fuel economy numbers will go up slightly.
Posted by Hates Idiots
15th Oct
-2 Votes
+ -
Who Cares
If the corn would have been NON-GMO corn it would have withstood the drought with a higher yield. Since all corn in the USA (unless marked certified organic) is GMO who cares! I personnally will never eat the GMO corn anymore. Put all that crap into ethanol fuel for all I care. Google "genetic roulette" and watch the video and you will see things going on you won't be able to believe. Amazing how companies can kill off their own kind for a dollar! We the people as a whole need to quickly put an end to the Monsanto manipulation of our food!
Posted by foolmeonce
15th Oct
+3 Votes
+ -
Wrong kind of corn
Since the corn used to make ethanol is feed corn, not sweet corn, you wouldn't be eating it anyway.

Only a small percentage of corn grown is sweet corn that humans eat (even less is popcorn). The vast majority of it is feed corn that humans only eat after it has been fed to animals or processed.
Posted by zackers
15th Oct
+1 Vote
+ -
Wrong
Field corn is used in the majority of all corn based foods not sweet corn. It's used for corn meal, corn flakes, corn oil, about every corn product you put in your mouth. Sweet corn is a non processed variant that we love with butter and salt.
Posted by Wildon883r
21st Oct
+3 Votes
+ -
Fermentation too complicated
First, fertilizer (ammonium nitrate) is needed. It is then shipped (fuel is burned) to farmers who use machinery to spread the fertilizer, harvest the corn and ship it to a site for fermentation (fuel x 3). The resulting ethanol is blended with a small amount of fuel and transported refineries to be blended with gasoline.

Why not start with ethylene (100 million tonnes are produced each year), and hydrate it to make ethanol. Ethylene is produced near refineries, so transport is minimized. No farmland is required.
Posted by jbelcherpc
15th Oct
+2 Votes
+ -
Sugar Cane
Why not use sugar cane to make ethanol ? " Why" more voters growing corn.. In this country it's not about what's best, it's about who has the most influence.
Posted by acyron
15th Oct
+2 Votes
+ -
Sugar is used.
Many South American nations use sugar for ethanol.

It has driven up the cost of processed food that contains sugar. Especially since corn syrup supplies have dwindled because of ethanol production.

Have you seen the price of candy for Halloween?
Posted by Hates Idiots
15th Oct
+4 Votes
+ -
We can't grow very much of it
While there's sugar cane grown in states like Hawaii, Louisiana, and Florida, we don't grow nearly enough of it to make ethanol out of it. Our climate just isn't optimal for cane sugar.

Most of the US "table" sugar comes from sugar beets, which can be grown in many northern states. However, it takes a lot of water.

Unfortunately, since the '30s the US sugar industry has gotten Congress to pass very high tariffs on imported sugar to prop up domestic sugar prices. Sugar in the US costs much more than it does elsewhere in the world, and it's too expensive to import to make ethanol. It's one reason why corn fructose is used as a sweetener instead of cane or beet sugar.
Posted by zackers
15th Oct
Join the conversation
Formatting +
BB Codes - Note: HTML is not supported in forums
  • [b] Bold [/b]
  • [i] Italic [/i]
  • [u] Underline [/u]
  • [s] Strikethrough [/s]
  • [q] "Quote" [/q]
  • [ol][*] 1. Ordered List [/ol]
  • [ul][*] · Unordered List [/ul]
  • [pre] Preformat [/pre]
  • [quote] "Blockquote" [/quote]

Join the SmartPlanet community and join the conversation! Signing up is fast and free. Don't wait -- we want to hear your opinion!