Big agriculture mislead the public about the benefits of biofuels
1–10 of 257 posts
Re: Big agriculture mislead the public about the benefits of biofuels
#2For years I saw saturation ads for the Archer-Daniels-Midland Corporation on PBS, I found out years that this is the prime beneficiary of the ethanol program.
Farmers growing corn for ethanol are growing broke despite subsidies. The program is an environmental disaster because people in the Mississippi River basin should be growing anything except corn because corn is a crop that requires huge imports of nitrogen fertilizer which burns fuel and leaches into the environment and creates a huge dead spot in the Gulf of Mexico.
Farmers make much better money from agrivoltaics, if they can convert 10-20% of their land they can produce a huge amount of energy and spare the fertilizer, it is not a one-way trip, the solar cells can be removed in the future and in the meantime it supports a more diverse ecosystem. People have no idea what a win-win it is.
Re: Big agriculture mislead the public about the benefits of biofuels
#3For years I saw saturation ads for the Archer-Daniels-Midland Corporation on PBS, I found out years that this is the prime beneficiary of the ethanol program. Farmers growing corn for ethanol are growing broke despite subsidies. The program is an environmental disaster because people in the Mississippi River basin should be growing anything except corn because corn is a crop that requires huge imports of nitrogen fer…
People know what a loss it is for the oil companies, and will not tolerate that.
Re: Big agriculture mislead the public about the benefits of biofuels
#4We've known for decades that it requires more energy to produce corn ethanol than is delivered in the ethanol produced. A lot of the necessary inputs are petroleum-based. This is not news.
What MIGHT be news is that the environmentalists who have been pushing biofuels as a "green" alternative to oil have finally figured out this basic physical fact.
Re: Big agriculture mislead the public about the benefits of biofuels
#5For years I saw saturation ads for the Archer-Daniels-Midland Corporation on PBS, I found out years that this is the prime beneficiary of the ethanol program. Farmers growing corn for ethanol are growing broke despite subsidies. The program is an environmental disaster because people in the Mississippi River basin should be growing anything except corn because corn is a crop that requires huge imports of nitrogen fer…
People know what a loss it is for the oil companies, and will not tolerate that.
[deleted]
Re: Big agriculture mislead the public about the benefits of biofuels
#6I know the general public should never be expected to subsidize enthusiasts, but E85 - available in many places for under $3/gal - has many of the same performance characteristics as $20/gal race gas for performance automotive enthusiasts.
I'm all for the peaceful and orderly dissolution of the entire US federal government, as involuntary taxation under implied threat of violence is theft, but until then, thanks for the deeply discounted race gas, fellow taxpayers!
Re: Big agriculture mislead the public about the benefits of biofuels
#7I read the whole article and I still don't see how Big Ag misled anyone. I may be misunderstanding, but it seems that the author is trying to differentiate between growing corn for food vs growing the same corn for ethanol. I assume the entire reason the lobby exists is that farmers want to grow corn for food and ethanol. But the researcher lost interest before proving anything around there. Maybe ethanol is actually worse, but I didn't see any evidence in this article.
Instead, this article is a master class in the red herring fallacy. Every person on the 'wrong' side of the issue has their sordid past and connections exposed, whether it's their association with Wall Street or the fact that they're a sex offender. Nevermind the science, the author just assumes that because the reader (presumably) has a certain political persuasion denigrating the other side will serve as a convincing argument.
Re: Big agriculture mislead the public about the benefits of biofuels
#8For years I saw saturation ads for the Archer-Daniels-Midland Corporation on PBS, I found out years that this is the prime beneficiary of the ethanol program. Farmers growing corn for ethanol are growing broke despite subsidies. The program is an environmental disaster because people in the Mississippi River basin should be growing anything except corn because corn is a crop that requires huge imports of nitrogen fer…
People know what a loss it is for the oil companies, and will not tolerate that.
To be fair, almost no oil goes to produce electricity in US although it is still used heavily in developing countries.
Re: Big agriculture mislead the public about the benefits of biofuels
#9Even DOGE didn't dare go after ethanol subsidies.[1] Even the Cato Institute, which is classic conservative in position, is against them.
[1] https://www.cato.org/commentary/trump-musk-doge-havent-gone-...
Re: Big agriculture mislead the public about the benefits of biofuels
#10Earlier quoted context omitted.
People know what a loss it is for the oil companies, and will not tolerate that.
To be fair, almost no oil goes to produce electricity in US although it is still used heavily in developing countries.
He should have said fuel companies or even gas companies but that's not colloquial I guess
Here's a breakdown by sources (2023)