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, study finds

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 264 posts

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

#71

Post by ravenstine »

> The research, which was funded in part by the National Wildlife Federation and U.S. Department of Energy

Can't imagine there's any conflict of interest there.

> 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.

The nice thing about words like "likely" is that it leaves the door open for the other thing. Did the study find that ethanol is more carbon-intensive, or is it someone's opinion that it's more intensive?

I don't see how this adds up. As the article mentions, the carbon atoms in ethanol came from the atmosphere to which it returns. Yet not all of the carbon even makes it back. But the mere tilling of the soil puts ethanol somewhere worse than fossil fuels?

By that logic, we'd better stop farming crops all together.

> Tilling fields releases carbon stored in soil, while other farming activities, like applying nitrogen fertilizers, also produce emissions.

And we're to assume that, without the production of fuel ethanol, the same land wouldn't be tilled and used for other crops?

What is the nature of the carbon in that soil? Is it carbon that is constantly making its way up through the soil and into the atmosphere? Does stable isotope testing corroborate that it's a meaningful contributor to the global increase in atmospheric CO2?

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

#73

Post by 2OEH8eoCRo0 »

deeviant wrote: post #39
2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wonder if this doesn't need to be the case. With the higher octane rating couldn't you in theory run a much more efficient and higher compression engine?

It's a simple case of it's energy density. The energy content of ethanol is about 33% less than pure gasoline. Higher octane doesn't even necessary equate to higher gas mileage. As soon as octane is high enough for your engine tuning, there's no mileage benefit.

> As soon as octane is high enough for your engine tuning, there's no mileage benefit.

That's exactly my point. Would it be possible to design an engine from the ground up for very high octane fuels?

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

#74

Post by tstrimple »

randomdata wrote: post #58
hammock wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>The corn will be grown either way. Citation needed

That was not a quote. No citation is possible. Is there a reason for this bad faith participation?

It doesn't seem to be bad faith. They are asking for your evidence for the claim that corn will be grown anyway. I agree that corn will continue to be grown anyway, but at this point it's nothing but our opinions without supporting evidence.

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

#76

Post by retrac »

jfengel wrote: post #53
cashsterling wrote: post #37

As others mentioned, this is not a new finding. There is a lot of academic and industrial/economic analysis on this subject. Ethanol from corn was never a good idea economically for anyone other than corn farmers. It is also bad environmentally and places additional competitive demand on our food supply (choice and competition between corn going into food or fuel supply). Similar analysis has been done on other crop…

Corn farmers from Iowa. Where they hold the first caucus of the interminable election season. No American politician or political party can afford to offend corn farmers. We should count ourselves lucky that our gasoline is only 10% corn.

It is surprising how much politics and law can affect what is grown where. The US-Canada border cuts right across the prairies. Conditions are pretty much identical in northern North Dakota and southern Manitoba. Yet the border is clearly visible on some maps of agricultural yield:

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:OatsYield.png

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:RyeYield.png

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

#77

Post by thrill »

randomdata wrote: post #58
hammock wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>The corn will be grown either way. Citation needed

That was not a quote. No citation is possible. Is there a reason for this bad faith participation?

Saying "the corn will be grown anyway" is not done in good faith. The corn is grown because it is profitable to do so. Remove subsidies and the corn will not be grown - something else that is profitable will be grown.

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

#78

Post by _greim_ »

tstrimple wrote: post #64
cashsterling wrote: post #37

As others mentioned, this is not a new finding. There is a lot of academic and industrial/economic analysis on this subject. Ethanol from corn was never a good idea economically for anyone other than corn farmers. It is also bad environmentally and places additional competitive demand on our food supply (choice and competition between corn going into food or fuel supply). Similar analysis has been done on other crop…

> places additional competitive demand on our food supply (choice and competition between corn going into food or fuel supply). I'm not sure this is the case. The vast majority of corn is field corn grown for silage anyway. The ethanol extraction process leaves a mash which is then fed to cows. Given the soil conditions, corn and soybeans will likely remain the most profitable cash crops so unless subsidies are creat…

> The ethanol extraction process leaves a mash which is then fed to cows.

Do analyses typically factor this sort of thing in, or do they assume corn is grown solely for the purpose of ethanol extraction?

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

#79

Post by bluGill »

ravenstine wrote: post #71

> The research, which was funded in part by the National Wildlife Federation and U.S. Department of Energy Can't imagine there's any conflict of interest there. > 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. The nice thing about words like "likely" is that it leaves the door open for the other th…

Plowing the soil is a terrible thing to do. Which is why no farmer has done it since around 1980. Modern tilling is much better for the soil, and doesn't release as much carbon form the soil (it needs more power from the tractor, and thus more CO2 from fuel, but still a lot less carbon total because the soil is saved.

The above is also why GMO crops are so great for the environment: by using a little roundup (just a little - not only is it a mist sprayed, but that mist is mostly water) much less fuel is used vs cultivating (think mechanical hoe).

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

#80

Post by mdp2021 »

randomdata wrote: post #58
hammock wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>The corn will be grown either way. Citation needed

That was not a quote. No citation is possible. Is there a reason for this bad faith participation?

> That was not a quote. No citation is possible

(The expression is not to be read literally. 'Citation needed', widespread after Wikipedia, rhetorically points to that idea in a generalized intention including "foundation needed". I.e.: "You need grounds to write that".)

Post reply on HN