Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

U.S. corn-based ethanol worse for the climate than gasoline

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 248 posts

Re: U.S. corn-based ethanol worse for the climate than gasoline

#21

Post by Synaesthesia »

jillesvangurp wrote: post #12

Corn in the US is mostly used for harmful purposes. It's used for producing fodder for intensive cattle farming (which of course produces lots of CO2). It's used for biofuel production, which as the article observes releases more CO2 than that it saves. And it's used for producing corn syrup which is an ingredient that nobody needs in their diet. The rest, which would be usage for e.g. corn bread or other staples of…

It's kinda hard to kill those subsidies when farmers have been used to them for 50 years, and it's a big political sticking point. The USDA exists to create more export crops. For the US, this might challenge that. That's also why the FDA can never rule that sugar or HFCS is harmful, it's a major American product, and that would be admitting that it's faulty.

Re: U.S. corn-based ethanol worse for the climate than gasoline

#22

Post by blihp »

assttoasstmgr wrote: post #20
jillesvangurp wrote: post #12

Corn in the US is mostly used for harmful purposes. It's used for producing fodder for intensive cattle farming (which of course produces lots of CO2). It's used for biofuel production, which as the article observes releases more CO2 than that it saves. And it's used for producing corn syrup which is an ingredient that nobody needs in their diet. The rest, which would be usage for e.g. corn bread or other staples of…

> Kill the subsidies and that whole industry slowly dies. That would be a good thing. Maybe repurpose the subsidies to have those farmers do something that actually is more productive and less harmful. So once we've put all the farmers out of work and declared success, what do you suggest they do that is "more productive"? Should they lease their corn fields to crypto bros?

Or... and I'm just spitballing here... perhaps switch to more productive crops? I would hope that no one believes we need fewer farmers here in the U.S. (we need more, IMO), but don't incentivize them to produce more of a given type of crop than actually makes sense.

Re: U.S. corn-based ethanol worse for the climate than gasoline

#23

Post by trhway »

i always thought that ethanol from corn is just a primer, just to jump start the ethanol usage in ICE while the efficient production tech - like ethanol/methanol from biomass - bamboo grows really fast - gets developed. We didn't get that tech and instead got EVs. Not bad. For the synthetic fuel which will still be needed by the hard-to-electrify industries like for example aviation - SpaceX anyway will have to develop an efficient way to produce synthetic methane, so that will come in time.

Re: U.S. corn-based ethanol worse for the climate than gasoline

#24

Post by JetAlone »

jillesvangurp wrote: post #12

Corn in the US is mostly used for harmful purposes. It's used for producing fodder for intensive cattle farming (which of course produces lots of CO2). It's used for biofuel production, which as the article observes releases more CO2 than that it saves. And it's used for producing corn syrup which is an ingredient that nobody needs in their diet. The rest, which would be usage for e.g. corn bread or other staples of…

No post body was provided.

Re: U.S. corn-based ethanol worse for the climate than gasoline

#25

Post by depereo »

assttoasstmgr wrote: post #20
jillesvangurp wrote: post #12

Corn in the US is mostly used for harmful purposes. It's used for producing fodder for intensive cattle farming (which of course produces lots of CO2). It's used for biofuel production, which as the article observes releases more CO2 than that it saves. And it's used for producing corn syrup which is an ingredient that nobody needs in their diet. The rest, which would be usage for e.g. corn bread or other staples of…

> Kill the subsidies and that whole industry slowly dies. That would be a good thing. Maybe repurpose the subsidies to have those farmers do something that actually is more productive and less harmful. So once we've put all the farmers out of work and declared success, what do you suggest they do that is "more productive"? Should they lease their corn fields to crypto bros?

....wheat? Rye? Any other similar staple crop?

It doesn't have to be some extreme shut down, it can be a transition to something better for society.

Re: U.S. corn-based ethanol worse for the climate than gasoline

#26

Post by assttoasstmgr »

blihp wrote: post #22
assttoasstmgr wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Kill the subsidies and that whole industry slowly dies. That would be a good thing. Maybe repurpose the subsidies to have those farmers do something that actually is more productive and less harmful. So once we've put all the farmers out of work and declared success, what do you suggest they do that is "more productive"? Should they lease their corn fields to crypto bros?

Or... and I'm just spitballing here... perhaps switch to more productive crops? I would hope that no one believes we need fewer farmers here in the U.S. (we need more, IMO), but don't incentivize them to produce more of a given type of crop than actually makes sense.

It's not that simple. Farmers typically rotate crops between corn, soybeans, clover, wheat, etc. It helps restore nutrients to the soil.

https://hgic.clemson.edu/factsheet/crop-rotation/

Re: U.S. corn-based ethanol worse for the climate than gasoline

#27

Post by Broken_Hippo »

blihp wrote: post #22
assttoasstmgr wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Kill the subsidies and that whole industry slowly dies. That would be a good thing. Maybe repurpose the subsidies to have those farmers do something that actually is more productive and less harmful. So once we've put all the farmers out of work and declared success, what do you suggest they do that is "more productive"? Should they lease their corn fields to crypto bros?

Or... and I'm just spitballing here... perhaps switch to more productive crops? I would hope that no one believes we need fewer farmers here in the U.S. (we need more, IMO), but don't incentivize them to produce more of a given type of crop than actually makes sense.

Switching to more productive crops wouldn't end subsidies. In face, we'd - at first - need more just to make sure folks have the proper equipment. If you currently grow corn and soybeans* then your equipment will be specialized for them, generally.

I don't know about the current landscape, as it has been years since I've lived in the states, let alone mingled with farmers in the US, but at one point, they would pay farmers to allow a field to be unplanted. I find this to be a viable option when mixed with the above and the farmers I knew didn't complain either.

*Corn and soybeans are generally grown together, generally (but not always) in alternating years. Corn tends to deplete nutrients in soil, soy puts them back.

Re: U.S. corn-based ethanol worse for the climate than gasoline

#28

Post by jillesvangurp »

njarboe wrote: post #19
jillesvangurp wrote: post #12

Corn in the US is mostly used for harmful purposes. It's used for producing fodder for intensive cattle farming (which of course produces lots of CO2). It's used for biofuel production, which as the article observes releases more CO2 than that it saves. And it's used for producing corn syrup which is an ingredient that nobody needs in their diet. The rest, which would be usage for e.g. corn bread or other staples of…

Iowa has the first primary every year in the US[1]. Iowa produces more corn than any state[2] while being 32nd in population. Corn is very important to people in Iowa and as long as the first two facts remain the same, corn will continue to be highly subsidized and supported in other ways by the US government. [1] https://www.uspresidentialelectionnews.com/2024-primary-sche... [2] https://www.cropprophet.com/us-corn-…

Precisely my point. Maybe that's not a very future proof plan for Iowa? That sounds like at some point they are going to have to cut loose from the federal handouts.

Re: U.S. corn-based ethanol worse for the climate than gasoline

#29

Post by Broken_Hippo »

depereo wrote: post #25
assttoasstmgr wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Kill the subsidies and that whole industry slowly dies. That would be a good thing. Maybe repurpose the subsidies to have those farmers do something that actually is more productive and less harmful. So once we've put all the farmers out of work and declared success, what do you suggest they do that is "more productive"? Should they lease their corn fields to crypto bros?

....wheat? Rye? Any other similar staple crop? It doesn't have to be some extreme shut down, it can be a transition to something better for society.

That sounds all simple, but if someone doesn't already grow those crops, they'll need to change equipment. They might need some time to gain knowledge - after all, they've specialized their field.

And "better for society" is... well, not a given. I don't know enough about farming to know what sorts of beneficial crops can be grown where corn/soybeans grow well and I'm not optimistic enough to think we won't just use the "new and improved" crop in much of the same abusive ways that we use the corn crops. I'm going to guess that we could make animal feed for confinement farming out of something that isn't corn We could probably make a sweet syrup out of it, too, and I'm guessing the main benefit to people is that they've made corn syrup the absolute villian and swept away nuance surrounding it, and would welcome the new replacement without much though.

We just need society to be a bit better, I suppose. Quit confinement farming livestock and have better animal welfare laws, for example. Make healthy eating very cheap (and easy with premade food too), have a sugar tax of sorts and food laws to keep sugar out of unexpected places and reduce sugar some other context. Oh, and probably expand public transport exponentially. Feed, corn syrup, and biofuel dependence should drop.

Re: U.S. corn-based ethanol worse for the climate than gasoline

#30

Post by mschuster91 »

bradknowles wrote: post #8
consp wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

The thing is, taxes here are used as a nudge. Meaning, you have decent public transport (subsidized by said taxes) and as a result people are incentivized to commute with said public transport instead of the government having to build 20+ lanes [1] highways.

[1]: https://www.cntraveler.com/story/the-worlds-widest-highway-s...

Post reply on HN