Food vs. Fuel(Pros and Cons of Ethanol)
yngster said 03/13, 06:46 PM
Ethanol is the future of fuel in America. The farmers benifit as well as the unemployed. The American farmers are recording of the chart profits and the companies that produce ethanol are creating tens of thousands of new jobs across the country. The ethanol industry is revitalizing small communities. Who could be opposed to alternative fuel.
Mark said 03/13, 07:08 PM
i ofcourse dont oppose alternative energy/fuel. I do however oppose ethanol use because even though it creates all those jobs, the price of food is expected to go up at least 3 times that off today if ethanol becomes our main use for fuel because we use the crops as fuel instead of food. (this based on a Standard times article written on Feb 24 2008)then if you also have to consider the impact we will be having. Using Ethanol will lead to the same or even more amounts of CO2 in the atmosphere when you consider the entire process. Fuel is sent out to the atmosphere my transporting all the corn or whatever else is used. then more CO2 is send out from the factories that produce, separate and basically make the corn into Ethanol. Then the ethanol is shipped over to places all over the U.S. You would also have to consider all the jobs being lost from the oil industry and that can never be replaced. Finally consider all the money and CO2 being sent out into the atmosphere from building all the factories needed for the whole process. Sure it helps farmers but it hurts the american people when it comes to jobs, food prices and the environment.
yngster said 03/13, 07:21 PM
The one problem with your argument is that you stated that the price of food will increase. Actually, the truth is that ethanol is produced out of field corn and most Americans eat sweet corn. The price of sweet corn should will not tripple. Although ethanol increases the amount of CO2, it is "eco friendly". In other words, it is biodegradable and wont ruin the enviornment is it spills or leaks the way oil will. Also, ethanol can be produced out of waste also. There is a company called Blue Fire that builds its plants next to waste dumps. What better way to help the enviornment than to make gas out of garbage. Lastly, after distilling the corn there is a feed stock left over. This feed stock can then be sold to cattle and chicken ranches. Since it is organic, it will alleviate concerns of mad cow disease spearding.
Mark said 03/15, 03:45 PM
Some random facts on the subject:
according to an article written by the NYTimes.
1. Because so much land is being cleared to grow them, most biofuels today are causing more global warming emissions than they prevent, even as they push the price of corn, wheat, and other foods out of reach for millions of people
2.filling the tank of an SUV with ethanol requires enough corn to feed a person for a year
3.Ethanol has a negative energy balance. Ethanol from corn, switchgrass, and wood biomass requires 29%, 50%, and 57% more energy, respectively, to create the ethanol than the energy contained within the fuel.
4.Because ethanol production requires a significant amount of energy, and most energy in the US is produced from coal, the small reduction in CO2 and other polluting emissions from burning ethanol versus gasoline will be more than offset by the power needed to produce the ethanol.
5.Ethanol crops have a notoriously low energy yield per hectare. Thus, it requires a large amount of land to produce a meaningful amount of ethanol. Last year, 20% of the total corn crop was used to produce ethanol, and it offset only 1% of US oil use.
ethanol is bad. There are other ways howev
yngster said 03/17, 11:08 AM
How can you say that ethanol is bad. The fact is that there are a few downsides to every feul source. You certainly can't argue that ethanol is worse for the enviornment that oil.
1)Once again you've stated that food prices will increase. That would be true if the United States produced the same amount of corn this year as it did last year. For three years running the U.S. has produced record breaking amounts of corn and they are expected to do the same this year. Food prices are not going to increase.
2)You stated that filling the tank of an SUV requires alot of corn. 2008 is the first year that cellulosic ethanol will be produced in the U.S. This can be made out of corn stalks and other organic waste.
3)You stated that producing cellulosic ethanol requires more energy and that ethanol plants are powered by coal and that coal off-sets the small reduction in Co2. Recently the plants have switched to methane gas as a power source for the plants. This allows them to produce much more ethanol more efficently. This is environmentally friendly. The farms have found a cheap way of getting methane from cow manure. So basicly the plants run on cow manure, not coal.
Mark said 03/22, 03:09 PM
firstly, methane was you said on N. 5. is actually bad for the environment. It's one of the leading greenhouse gases other than CO2 and nitrogen oxide. so these methane plants are actually bad for the environment. you stated that 2008 would be the first year that cellulosic ethanol will be produced in the U.S. but do the trucks and tractors and ships that transport these ethanal source run on ethanol? No they don't. they run on oil which destroys the ocean and increases the effects of global warming. I would also like to stated that i never said ethanol was worse than oil i just said it was bad.
2. You never argued against me when it came to the land. The demand for corn is going to increase if we start using ethanol(cuz ppl are gonna start using it to drive)as the demand goes up, the supplies also has to. So the need for more farming land will greatly increase and we will see an increase of deforestation than is currently taking place. With less forests we lose more wildlife, and less trees to suck in Carbon Dioxide. and don't forget Pharmacies rely on them for medicine.
U also never argued gainst my n.3 arguement. i just don't have space to retype it in.
Comments
Add Your Comment
I reserve the right to change my vote, but so far, I think yngster's right about the benefits of ethanol.
IamFry | 03/14/08
Report Offensive Comment
One thing. Mark states that CO2 levels would rise with Ethanol-based fuels. Excuse me for being public schooled, but plants convert CO2 into O2. However, petroleum emissions release CO, Carbon Monoxide, which cannot be used by plants and degrades the environment. So, wouldn't this be better for the ecosystem? Besides, jobs lost in Oil production would be gained by ethanol production plants. And since most of it could be grown on land that has been sold by farmers in the Golden Belt States, it would also help the American Farmer, who has had to sludge through bills and debt for the past ten years. yngster gets my vote on this one. Sorry.
J.A.B.C. | 03/14/08
Report Offensive Comment
The cost of producing ethanol varies with the cost of the feedstock used and the scale of production. Approximately 85 percent of ethanol production capacity in the United States relies on corn feedstock. The cost of producing ethanol from corn is estimated to be about $1.10 per gallon. Although there is currently no commercial production of ethanol from cellulosic feedstocks such as agricultural wastes, grasses and wood, the estimated production cost using these feedstocks is $1.15 to $1.43 per gallon. Because a gallon of ethanol contains less energy than a gallon of gasoline, the production cost of ethanol must be multiplied by a factor of 1.5 to make an energy-cost comparison with gasoline. This means that if ethanol costs $1.10 per gallon to produce, then the effective cost per gallon to equal the energy contained in a gallon of gasoline is $1.65. In contrast, the current wholesale price of gasoline is about 90 cents per gallon. The federal motor fuel excise tax on gasohol, a blended fuel of 10-percent ethanol and 90-percent gasoline, is 5.4 cents less per gallon than the tax on straight gasoline. In other words, the federal subsidy is 54 cents per gallon of ethanol when the ethanol is blended with gasoline. The subsidy makes ethanol-blended fuel competitive in the marketplace and stimulates the growth of an ethanol production and distribution infrastructure.
jesterjabs | 03/14/08
Report Offensive Comment
The above was published in August of 2007. What is the primary source of energy for Ethanol production? Coal! Beautiful, bountiful, clean burning coal! With a government subsidy to promote "Green" energy sources, would you as a farmer grow a highly competitive crop of sweet corn, requiring more effort, water and energy, or would you prefer the guaranteed profit of government subsidized feed corn? How will the reduction of sweet corn availability affect food and beverage prices? I would rather invest in biogas production and ameliorate some of the environmental damage produced as the rain forest is converted to pasture land.
jesterjabs | 03/14/08
Report Offensive Comment
Mark... its ok if you were going to mention something that Jesterjabs mentioned. He probably took something away from your argument. I wont accuse you of plagiarizing him.
yngster | 03/15/08
Report Offensive Comment
AS long as you dont use the same quote or copy everything word for word.
yngster | 03/15/08
Report Offensive Comment
Corn Syrup, which can be found in coca-cola, can be made out of field corn also.
yngster | 03/15/08
Report Offensive Comment
i didnt copy of of jesterjabs. i got it off a site wanna see. here it is. i also got it from a washington post article. http://www.gimme-five.com/2007/06/ethanol-is-bad-ethanol-from-corn-is-worse/
Mark | 03/15/08
Report Offensive Comment
There is not enough room. 1200 words is not enough words to put forth an adequate argument. I also wanted to say that ethanol will rescue our economy. Ethanol alone will generate 406 million for local economies. It also adds 223 billion to gross state output. This will bring us out of the recession we're in and it will rescue the housing market.
yngster | 03/17/08
Report Offensive Comment
Mark... you should check the date on the newspaper articles you are reading. Recently the ethanol industry has come up with solutions to the problems put forth in your argument. You argument seems to be out dated.
yngster | 03/17/08
Report Offensive Comment
By the way jester... i agree that biogas is a good investment. Ethanol producing companies have begun to use that as opposed to coal.
yngster | 03/17/08
Report Offensive Comment
Hydrogen power is what we need!! Fuel from water? How can you argue with that?
ShawnF | 03/18/08
Report Offensive Comment
Sustainable, positive energy ethanol does not come from corn - it comes from cellulosic ethanol plants such as switchgrass. Corn is used in current biofuel projections for one simple reason : we have a lot of it. Any argument that even considers the question of sustainable, long-term energy using corn as a basis is fundamentally flawed. The only use of corn as a biofuel is that it will help us set up the infrastructure while the research and development of an efficient biofuel feedstock crop is carried out. http://www.brachypodium.org/
priestly | 03/20/08
Report Offensive CommentPost A Comment
Please keep it clean. Bad words will get filtered, and offensive comments will be removed.
Only Axl Rose remains in the group, but since 1987 GnR has been rocking with fury
More than 50 years of cover stories about the 35th President
The other thing I should ave pointed out in my second argument is, the job loss you are refering to is inevitable. It is not related to ethanol at all. As the oil drys up, so will the jobs in that particular field.
yngster | 03/13/08
Report Offensive Comment