U.S. corn-based ethanol worse for the climate than gasoline
1–10 of 248 posts
Re: U.S. corn-based ethanol worse for the climate than gasoline
#21. I can't believe 2005 was the rage with biofuels.
2. Many people, AV, boats, powertoys, lawn equipment (it's own pollution there but that's another article) dislike ethanol in gasoline, especially for older cars.
3. Who wins in the end? The corn farmers for the past, 17 years?
4. Why did it take 17 years for this study to be funded and published.
5. If it's economical to move back to "pure gasoline" will we? Just using pure gasoline means we are 24% more efficient on carbon:
"The research, which was funded in part by the National Wildlife Federation and U.S. Department of Energy, found that ethanol is likely at least 24% more carbon-intensive than gasoline due to emissions resulting from land use changes to grow corn, along with processing and combustion."
Simply incredible, back in 05, it was one a gas shock, gas used to cost $1.25'ish on average and went up quite a bit, $3 or so - https://money.cnn.com/2005/09/01/markets/gas_prices/index.ht... and that was in 2005 dollars. Average car MPG got 14-22mpg.
6. This was not new, even back then everyone knew: https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/the-etha... but not exactly how it was 24% more intensive then gasoline.
Re: U.S. corn-based ethanol worse for the climate than gasoline
#3Good article on ethanol as a replacement for lead in gas. Changed my view on it as an additive: https://doomberg.substack.com/p/in-praise-of-corn-ethanol?r=...
(Though not as an alternative)
Re: U.S. corn-based ethanol worse for the climate than gasoline
#41. I can't believe 2005 was the rage with biofuels. 2. Many people, AV, boats, powertoys, lawn equipment (it's own pollution there but that's another article) dislike ethanol in gasoline, especially for older cars. 3. Who wins in the end? The corn farmers for the past, 17 years? 4. Why did it take 17 years for this study to be funded and published. 5. If it's economical to move back to "pure gasoline" will we? Just u…
Current mixes are about 15% ethanol, so are only increasing carbon emissions by 4%. The ethanol helps the gas burn a bit cleaner.
But, yeah, it's definitely not on the path to a carbon neutral economy.
Re: U.S. corn-based ethanol worse for the climate than gasoline
#5This article misses a key point: Ethanol is used to oxygenate the fuel, which reduces carbon monoxide and soot emissions. It replaced MTBE in that role.
It was never intended to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Producing it requires more energy than it provides, and this was known long before it was introduced. It might be possible to power the production with renewable energy, but that's just extra steps for powering cars with renewables.
Re: U.S. corn-based ethanol worse for the climate than gasoline
#61. I can't believe 2005 was the rage with biofuels. 2. Many people, AV, boats, powertoys, lawn equipment (it's own pollution there but that's another article) dislike ethanol in gasoline, especially for older cars. 3. Who wins in the end? The corn farmers for the past, 17 years? 4. Why did it take 17 years for this study to be funded and published. 5. If it's economical to move back to "pure gasoline" will we? Just u…
3$/gallon sounds so cheap to me. I'm paying almost 2.5$/liter. I'm pretty sure that will reduce emissions massively more than any change in fuel composition wherever the fuel comes from.
Re: U.S. corn-based ethanol worse for the climate than gasoline
#7Some counterpoints:
- Ethanol effectively helps spread carbon emissions across a larger area. It significantly cleans the air around large cities, I guess at the expense of more emissions in rural areas? But then again I'd guess most of those rural areas are not super concerned about carbon emissions and are very supportive of corn subsidies.
- Of the three goals of adding ethanol to gasoline, it seems like 2 of 3 of them are completely successful: "The policy was intended to reduce emissions, support farmers, and cut U.S. dependence on energy imports."
Re: U.S. corn-based ethanol worse for the climate than gasoline
#81. I can't believe 2005 was the rage with biofuels. 2. Many people, AV, boats, powertoys, lawn equipment (it's own pollution there but that's another article) dislike ethanol in gasoline, especially for older cars. 3. Who wins in the end? The corn farmers for the past, 17 years? 4. Why did it take 17 years for this study to be funded and published. 5. If it's economical to move back to "pure gasoline" will we? Just u…
3$/gallon sounds so cheap to me. I'm paying almost 2.5$/liter. I'm pretty sure that will reduce emissions massively more than any change in fuel composition wherever the fuel comes from.
That’s European-style taxes for you. Sadly.
You get a lot of benefits from European-style government, like socialized medicine. But then you also have to pay those taxes.
Re: U.S. corn-based ethanol worse for the climate than gasoline
#9Some counterpoints: - Ethanol effectively helps spread carbon emissions across a larger area. It significantly cleans the air around large cities, I guess at the expense of more emissions in rural areas? But then again I'd guess most of those rural areas are not super concerned about carbon emissions and are very supportive of corn subsidies. - Of the three goals of adding ethanol to gasoline, it seems like 2 of 3 of…
I am pretty sure that carbon emissions are only a global concern (global warming), not a local concern, while the reverse is true for other pollutants like particulate and nitrogen oxides.
Re: U.S. corn-based ethanol worse for the climate than gasoline
#10Lots of short term vs long term issues here. Some applications like air travel really rely on hydrocarbons, with no practical substitutes available. Refining technology to produce fuel by capturing atmospheric carbon is helpful even if current technology is less efficient than fossil fuels. Surely practical biofuel is more achievable than practical fusion in short/medium term.