Each year in early October my grandfather summoned my entire family to come to his farm and harvest potatoes. Hunched over on all fours, each person quietly filled their buckets with these "earth apples." Each year he used a different field for his crop. One year he would plant potatoes, the next year beets or wheat. The potato replaced the grain diet on the European continent. It became survival food, especially during the two World Wars. Dumplings, potato salad and mashed potatoes are only a few potato dishes found in a long list in the European cuisine. The easy adaptability of the potato to grow almost anywhere in the world can produce an annual crop of 322 million tons of potatoes. Many African countries greatly benefit from growing the potatoes because they make them more self-sufficient in their food production.
In the age of nation building, stamping out of global warming, and driving for energy self-sufficiency, the new state appointed rival of the potato is maize, which is better known as corn – the yellow cob-born grain used in the production of ethanol fuel. As a blend with gasoline, biofuel powers automobiles and farm equipment. Its environmental friendly side effect is to reduce greenhouse gases, and some say it is the key to everlasting energy security in the future.
Ethanol fuel production received its first stimulus after the Arab oil crisis in 1973. During 1978 the US federal government sealed the project with the Energy Tax Act authorizing tax exemptions by blending gasoline with 10 percent ethanol. A floodgate of free money opened up for farmers and ethanol producers as the energy and agricultural departments spent billions of dollars on subsidies. This year’s estimates are between $5.5 billion to $7.3 billion of our tax dollars to be handed out to corn growers.
The incentives for farmers to grow corn in the US is not to meet the needs of a market that entails a healthy profit. Instead, they plant corn because they get paid to do so by a federal government interested in ethanol production. And as it turns out, producing ethanol is an expensive process. Archer Daniels Midland Corporation (ADM) out of Illinois, one of the largest producers of ethanol, received as much as $10 billion in subsidies between 1980 through 1997 along with favorable tax breaks costing taxpayers an average of $30 for every dollar ADM earns in profits. Add to that the $500 of federal and state subsidies it takes to reduce one metric ton of CO2-equivalent, one can literarily say that it is governments who heat up the globe by burning cash.
This year corn production has already increased by 15 percent over last year. Even President Bush, not a green lover but excited about ethanol, is expecting that farmers will plant 90.5 millions of acres of corn in 2007 in order to meet the demands of ethanol production of 132 billion liters by 2017. Corn prices already went up by 50 percent. The average price per bushel of $1.95, which had held steady over the past eight years, jumped up to $3.05 in January of this year, and is expected to rise as high as $3.40.
Corn is feedstock. It is consumed not only by humans but also by hogs, chickens and cattle. The drastic side-effect of higher corn prices is now reflected in the higher prices in the grocery store. The price of food went up 3.9 percent last year – faster than the inflation rate, which ranges around 2.7 in 2007. In particular, pork, beef, milk, eggs and poultry show drastic increases in their prices. So do fruits and vegetables. Considering that most people spend an average of 10 percent of their disposable income on food, higher prices in grocery reduces the spending on cars, homes or clothing. Health Nazis should also be concerned, since these higher prices drive people to cheaper processed foods that add to increased health risks in the poor segment of the population.
The US Federal Government’s targeted goal is to replace gasoline with corn-based fuel as an alternative energy source. This has caught the attention of poorer countries. Mexico, for example, is gradually replacing agave, a spiky-leaved, large plant which grows on high and arid land and takes eight years to reach maturity, with corn. Agave is the main ingredient for Tequila. Mexico produced 25 to 35 percent less agave this year and farmers take less care of their agave crop in favor of higher corn prices. The World Food Program (WFP), which recently stated that it can no longer feed the poor due to the impact of biofuel demand on food prices, is foolishly encouraging African and Latin American countries to take advantage of the rising demand of biofuels by planting corn; a popular world practice that is now devastating 900 million of the world’s poorest which rely on the UN feeding program.
It is quite clear that the state-inflated demand for corn is causing a global imbalance in food production. Farmers are replacing a variety of vegetables and fruits with corn due to the higher profit-per-acre corn brings. The two-year practice of crop rotation for corn drains the soil and requires more fertilizers on the following soybean crop. The additional cost ends up with the consumer. As food prices rise, it is the poor who suffer most from this inflated demand for biofuel. It is a burden that most people cannot afford as inflation keeps rising because of irresponsible spending and government debt.
The federal budget for the fiscal year beginning this October called for $2.9 trillion dollars in government spending. It includes increases for all the various cabinet-level departments. Among them were a 5.4 percent increase for the Department of Energy and 3.6 percent increase for Agriculture. According to Richard M. Ebeling, President of The Freeman, the average US household would have to shell out approximately $25,845 in taxes to cover the budget. Include with it the US federal government’s pre-existing liabilities of several trillion, and the average US household would have to pay an additional $31,000 a year for 75 years to pay off the debt already incurred by government spending. How can an average income household cover the basic needs such as food, clothing, and shelter when tax burdens already devour the wages of a lower income population? Poor people only become poorer as spending continues.
Republican presidential candidate Dr. Ron Paul seems to be the only congressional member who understands the global effects of subsidies. During his second presidential debate the question came up about oil profits. His response was: "I don’t think the profits are the issue. The profits are okay if they’re legitimately earned in a free market. What I object to are subsidies to big corporations when we subsidize them and give them R%26amp;D (Research %26amp; Development) money. I don’t think that should be that way. They should take it out of the funds that they earn..."
Here lies the answer to many of the energy questions. Let the private sector find a solution to new energy sources. Already technology advances at a rapid speed and its products remain ultimately competitive on the market where prices drop and become affordable to the average consumer. Just think of recent changes from VCRs and phonograph records to DVD’s and CD players, and the addition of cell phones and portable computers to modern life. All are now available at reasonable prices to low-income households. Industry continually comes up with new inventions that contribute highly to communication, organization and entertainment. The only sectors that remain high in cost with outrageous prices are sectors that are under government regulation and control: health care, medicine, education, housing, and now food prices. It would be a life-saving act of mercy to close these various departments of government, if people want to have a future for the next generation.
The trouble caused on the global market by the federal government’s sponsored ethanol industry increasingly outweighs the good it does. The idea of sacrificing food production in the name of biofuel as a future source of energy is an irrational concept. The consequence of higher food prices due to corn production hasn’t come from consumer choice but from government coercion. If the demand for energy is increasing, and biofuel is the answer, then where will the world grow its food? The big believers in a government supported biofuel industry might have to prepare for another big tsunami to hit the shores of Third World countries and at home if this insanity isn’t stopped. Just don’t blame capitalism if and when it comes.
July 21, 2007
Sabine Barnhart
What to konw about Ethanol Industry ? and the result of this political idea? another state plan ?
Ethanol fuel is ethanol (ethyl alcohol), the same type of alcohol found in alcoholic beverages. It can be used as a fuel, mainly as a biofuel alternative to gasoline, and is widely used in cars in Brazil. Because it is cheap, easy to manufacture and process, and can be made from very common materials, such as corn, it is steadily becoming a highly respected and researched alternative to gasoline throughout much of the world.
Anhydrous ethanol, that is, ethanol with at most 1% water, the same alcohol as found in alcoholic beverages, can be blended with gasoline in varying quantities up to pure ethanol (E100), and most spark-ignited gasoline style engines will operate well with mixtures of 10% ethanol (E10).[1] Most cars on the road today in the U.S. can run on blends of up to 10% ethanol,[2] and the use of 10% ethanol gasoline is mandated in some cities where harmful levels of auto emissions are possible.[3]
Ethanol can be mass-produced by fermentation of sugar or by hydration of ethylene from petroleum and other sources. Current interest in ethanol mainly lies in bio-ethanol, produced from the starch or sugar in a wide variety of crops, but there has been considerable debate about how useful bio-ethanol will be in replacing fossil fuels in vehicles. Concerns relate to the large amount of arable land required for crops,[4] as well as the energy and pollution balance of the whole cycle of ethanol production.[5][6] Recent developments with cellulosic ethanol production and commercialization may allay some of these concerns.[7]
According to the International Energy Agency, cellulosic ethanol could allow ethanol fuels to play a much bigger role in the future than previously thought.[8] Cellulosic ethanol can be made from plant matter composed primarily of inedible cellulose fibers that form the stems and branches of most plants. Dedicated energy crops, such as switchgrass, are also promising cellulose sources that can be produced in many regions of the United States.[9]
In the U.S., there is potential to expand the market for ethanol fuels beyond the farm states where they have been most popular to date. Flex-fuel vehicles are assisting in this transition because they allow drivers to choose different fuels based on price and availability. The Energy Policy Act of 2005, which calls for 7.5 billion US gallons of biofuels to be used annually by 2012, should also help to expand the U.S. marketThe top five ethanol producers in 2005 were Brazil (4.35 billion US gallons per year), the United States (4.3 billion US gallons per year), China (530 MMgy), the European Union (250 MMgy) and India (80 MMgy). Brazil and the United States accounted for 90 percent of all ethanol production. Also, it should be noted that the United States, now producing at a rate of about 4.6 billion US gallons per year, is widely considered the world’s largest ethanol producer. Strong incentives, coupled with other industry development initiatives, are giving rise to fledgling ethanol industries in countries such as Thailand, the Philippines, Columbia, the Dominican Republic and Malawi. Nevertheless, ethanol hasn't yet made much of a dent in world oil consumption.[32]
[edit] Brazil
Main article: Ethanol fuel in Brazil
Gasoline on the left, alcohol on the right at a filling station in BrazilBrazil has one of the largest bio-fuel programs in the world, involving production of ethanol fuel from sugar cane, and ethanol now provides 18 percent of the country's automotive fuel. As a result of this, together with the exploitation of domestic deep water oil sources, Brazil, which years ago had to import a large share of the petroleum needed for domestic consumption, recently reached complete self-sufficiency in oil.[33][34][35]
Brazil produced around 16.4 billion liters of ethanol in 2004 and used 2.7 million hectares of land area for this production (4.5% of the Brazilian land area used for crop production in 2005[36]). Of this, around 12.4 billion liters were produced as fuel for ethanol-powered vehicles in the domestic market. In Brazil, ethanol-powered and flexible-fuel vehicles are manufactured for operation with hydrated ethanol, an azeotrope of ethanol (around 93% v/v) and water (7%).
Production and use of ethanol has been stimulated through: (1) low-interest loans for the construction of ethanol distilleries; (2) guaranteed purchase of ethanol by the state-owned oil company at a reasonable price; (3) retail pricing of neat ethanol so it is competitive if not slightly favorable to the gasoline-ethanol blend; and (4) tax incentives provided during the 1980s to stimulate the purchase of neat ethanol vehicles.[37]
Guaranteed purchase and price regulation were ended some years ago, with relatively positive results. In addition to these other policies, ethanol producers in the state of Sao Paulo established a research and technology transfer center that has been effective in improving sugar cane and ethanol yields.[38]
[edit] United States
A Ford Taurus "fueled by clean burning ethanol" owned by New York City.Main article: Ethanol fuel in the United States
Most cars on the road today in the U.S. can run on blends of up to 10% ethanol, and motor vehicle manufacturers already produce vehicles designed to run on much higher ethanol blends. Ford, DaimlerChrysler, and GM are among the automobile companies that sell “flexible-fuel” cars, trucks, and minivans that can use gasoline and ethanol blends ranging from pure gasoline up to 85% ethanol (E85). By mid-2006, there were approximately six million E85-compatible vehicles on U.S. roads.[39]
There is potential to expand the market for ethanol fuels beyond the farm states where they have been most popular to date. Flex-fuel vehicles are assisting in this transition because they allow drivers to choose different fuels based on price and availability. The Energy Policy Act of 2005, which calls for 7.5 billion US gallons of biofuels to be used annually by 2012, should also help to expand the U.S. market.[40]
It should also be noted that the growing ethanol and biodiesel industries are providing jobs in plant construction, operations, and maintenance, mostly in rural communities. According to the Renewable Fuels Association, the ethanol industry created almost 154,000 U.S. jobs in 2005 alone, boosting household income by $5.7 billion. It also contributed about $3.5 billion in tax revenues at the local, state, and federal levels.[41]
[edit] Sweden
Main article: Ethanol fuel in Sweden
All Swedish gas stations are required by an act of parliament to offer at least one alternative fuel, and every fifth car in Stockholm now drives at least partially on alternative fuels, mostly ethanol.[42]
Stockholm will introduce a fleet of Swedish-made electric hybrid buses in its public transport system on a trial basis in 2008. These buses will use ethanol-powered internal-combustion engines and electric motors. The vehicles’ diesel engines will use ethanol.[43]
[edit] Australia
Main article: Ethanol fuel in Australia
Legislation imposes a 10% cap on the concentration of fuel ethanol blends. Blends of 90% unleaded petrol and 10% fuel ethanol are commonly referred to as E10. E10 is available through service stations operating under the BP, Caltex, Shell and United brands as well as those of a number of smaller independents. Not surprisingly, E10 is most widely available closer to the sources of production in Queensland and New South Wales. E10 is most commonly blended with 91 RON "regular unleaded" fuel. There is a requirement that retailers label blends containing fuel ethanol on the dispenser.
[edit] China
China is promoting ethanol-based fuel on a pilot basis in five cities in its central and northeastern region, a move designed to create a new market for its surplus grain and reduce consumption of petroleum. The cities include Zhengzhou, Luoyang and Nanyang in central China's Henan province, and Harbin and Zhaodong in Heilongjiang province, northeast China. Under the program, Henan will promote ethanol-based fuel across the province by the end of this year. Officials say the move is of great importance in helping to stabilize grain prices, raise farmers' income and reducing petrol- induced air pollution.[44]
[edit] Environment
[edit] Energy balance
Main article: Ethanol fuel energy balance
All biomass needs to go through some of these steps: it needs to be grown, collected, dried, fermented and burned. All of these steps require resources and an infrastructure.
Opponents of corn ethanol production in the U.S. often quote the 2005 paper [45] of David Pimentel, a retired Entomologist, and Tadeusz Patzek, a Geological Engineer from Berkeley. Both have been exceptionally critical of ethanol and other biofuels. Their studies contend that ethanol, and biofuels in general, are "energy negative", meaning they take more energy to produce than is contained in the final product.
A 2006 report by the U.S. Department Agriculture compared the methodologies used by a number of researchers on this subject and found that the majority of research showed that the energy balance for ethanol is positive. In fact, a large number of recent studies, including a 2006 article[46] in the prestigious journal Science offer the consensus opinion that fuels like ethanol are energy positive. Furthermore, it should be pointed out that fossil fuels also require significant energy inputs which have seldom been accounted for in the past.
It is also important to note that ethanol is not the only product created during production, and the energy content of the by-products must also be considered. Corn is typically 66% starch and the remaining 33% is not fermented. This unfermented component is called distillers grain, which is high in fats and proteins, and makes good animal feed. [47]
In Brazil where sugar cane is used, the yield is higher, and conversion to ethanol is somewhat more energy efficient than corn.[14] Recent developments with cellulosic ethanol production may improve yields even further.[48]
[edit] Air pollution
Compared with conventional unleaded gasoline, ethanol is a particulate-free burning fuel source that combusts cleanly with oxygen to form carbon dioxide and water. The Clean Air Act requires the addition of oxygenates to reduce carbon monoxide emissions in the United States. The additive MTBE is currently being phased out due to ground water contamination, hence ethanol becomes an attractive alternative additive.
Use of ethanol, produced from current (2006) methods, emits a similar net amount of carbon dioxide but less carbon monoxide than gasoline.[49] If all bioethanol-production energy came from non-fossil sources the use of bioethanol as a fuel would add no greenhouse gas.[50]
[edit] Manufacture
In 2002 , monitoring of ethanol plants revealed that they released VOCs (volatile organic compounds) at a higher rate than had previously been disclosed.[51] The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) subsequently reached settlement with Archer Daniels Midland and Cargill, two of the largest producers of ethanol, to reduce emission of these VOCs. VOCs are produced when fermented corn mash is dried for sale as a supplement for livestock feed. Devices known as thermal oxidizers or catalytic oxidizers can be attached to the plants to burn off the hazardous gases. Smog causing pollutants are also increased by using ethanol fuel in comparison to gasoline.
[edit] Greenhouse gas abatement
Corn ethanol has received much support on environmental grounds primarily because of its role in reducing greenhouse gas emissions. However, the evidence for this claim is mixed.
A recent ten-year forecast of ethanol production by the USDA places 2017 corn ethanol production at 12 billion US gallons and growing at only 2% per year. This estimate, together with a parameter publishing in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS), indicates that this near-maximum level of ethanol production will abate GHG emissions by 0.13% (~1/10 of 1%) of current US GHG emissions. However, this does not hold for all greenhouse gases. Another study has suggested that replacement of 100% petroleum fuel with E85 (a fuel mixture comprised of 85% ethanol and 15% petroleum) would significantly increase ozone levels, thereby increasing photochemical smog and aggravating medical problems such as asthma.[19][20]
This value reflects increases in corn area and the use of 30% of the corn crop for ethanol. It also apparently takes into account anticipated improvements in corn yields and ethanol production. The PNAS value is a 12% reduction in greenhouse gas emission relative to the "net emissions of production and combustion of an energetically equivalent amount of gasoline."
The January 2006 Science article from UC Berkeley's ERG, estimated this parameter to be 13% after reviewing a large number of studies. However, in a correction to that article releases shortly after publication, they reduce the estimated value to 7.4%. None of the other values needed to complete the calculation are controversial.
GREET model maintained by Argonne National Labs in Chicago has produced a series of publications on GHG abatement through ethanol. The latest of the studies is [21]
[edit] Land use
Large-scale 'energy farming', necessary to produce agricultural alcohol, requires substantial amounts of cultivated land. Some have claimed that land is acquired through deforestation, while others have observed that areas currently supporting forests are usually not suitable for growing any sort of crops.[52][53] Related concerns have been raised regarding a decline in soil fertility due to reduction of organic matter[54], a decrease in water availability and quality, an increase in the use of pesticides and fertilizers, and potential dislocation of local communities.[55]
As demand for ethanol fuel increases, food crops are replaced by fuel crops, driving food supply down and food prices up. Growing demand for ethanol in the United States has increased corn prices by 50% in Mexico.[56] Average barley prices in the United States rose 17% from January to June 2007 to the highest in 11 years. Prices for all grain crops trend upward, reflecting a progressive increase in farm land devoted to corn for the production of produce ethanol fuel.[57] Prices for U.S. corn-based products, including animal feed, also rise. This translates to higher prices for animal products like chicken, beef, and cheese. June 2007 cheese prices rose to $2 per pound on average, increasing 65% over the same period in 2006. As milk prices in the United States, approached $4.00 per US gallon, [58] many American restaurant franchises announced price increases for their products to compensate for rising food costs.[59] [60] [61]
Alternatively, cellulosic ethanol can be produced from any plant material, potentially doubling yields, in an effort to minimize conflict between food needs versus fuel needs.[62] Instead of utilizing only the starch bi-products from grinding wheat and other crops, cellulosic ethanol production maximizes the use of all plant materials, including gluten. This approach would have a smaller carbon footprint because the amount of energy-intensive fertilisers and fungicides remain the same for higher output of usable material.[63] While the enzyme technology[64] for producing cellulosic ethanol is currently in developmental stages, it is not expected to be available for large-scale production in the near future.[65] Moreover, the production of ethanol for fuel raises a number of land scarcity issues, regardless of what production method is employed. Many analysts suggest that biofuel strategies must be accompanied by fuel conservation restrictions. [66]
[edit] Renewable resource
Ethanol is considered "renewable" because it is primarily the result of conversion of the sun's energy into usable energy. Creation of ethanol starts with photosynthesis causing the feedstocks such as switchgrass, sugar cane, or corn to grow. These feedstocks are processed into ethanol (see production).
The environmental and economic benefits of non-cellulosic ethanol - including corn ethanol - have been heavily critiqued by many, including Brad Ewing of Environmental Economics %26amp; Sustainable Development[67] and Lester R. Brown of Earth Policy Institute.[68] The main criticism dwells on the increasing costs of corn for food as the demand for ethanol production increases. It remains to be seen [vague] if ethanol production can overcome these problems.
Current, first generation processes for the production of ethanol from corn use only a small part of the corn plant: the corn kernels are taken from the corn plant and only the starch, which represents about 50% of the dry kernel mass, is transformed into ethanol. Two types of second generation processes are under development. The first type uses enzymes to convert the plant cellulose into ethanol while the second type uses pyrolysis to convert the whole plant to either a liquid bio-oil or a syngas. Second generation processes can also be used with plants such as grasses, wood or agricultural waste material such as straw.
[edit] Replacement of petroleum
Only about 5% of the fossil energy required to produce ethanol from corn in the United States is obtained from non-US petroleum.[69] Current (2006) United States production methods obtain the rest of the fossil energy from domestic coal and natural gas. Even if the energy balance were negative, US production involves mostly domestic fuels such as natural gas and coal so the need for non-US petroleum would be reduced. Developed regions like the United States and Europe, and increasingly the developing nations of Asia, mainly India and China, consume much more petroleum and natural gas than they extract from their territory, becoming dependent upon foreign suppliers as a resultThe science of Economics is generally defined as the study of scarcity management. Absent scarcity and alternative uses of available resources, there is no economic problem. As such, the subject of economics involves the study of choices as they are affected by incentives and resources.[70] Since land and agriculture have historically served the world as utilities for food production, many believe the alternative use of agricultural resources for ethanol fuel production imposes an artificial scarcity of food on a global scale.[71] [72] [73] [74]
Meanwhile, the United States Department of Energy, finds that for every unit of energy put towards ethanol production, 1.3 units are returned.[75] Another study found that corn-grain ethanol produced 1.25 units of energy per unit put in.[76] As yields improve or different feedstocks are introduced, ethanol production may become more economically feasible in the US. Currently, research on improving ethanol yields from each unit of corn is underway using biotechnology. By utilizing hybrids designed specifically with higher extractable starch levels, the energy balance is dramatically improved. Also, as long as oil prices remain high, the economical use of other feedstocks, such as cellulose, become viable. By-products such as straw or wood chips can be converted to ethanol. Fast growing species like switchgrass can be grown on land not suitable for other cash crops and yield high levels of ethanol per unit areaCritics argue that ethanol is a fancy way of using solar power. The processing and production, as well as burning of ethanol would not significantly improve carbon emissions over the current use of gasoline. Instead, critics propose the widespread adoption of battery electric vehicles (zero emissions vehicles) combined with increased use of nuclear power and solar power.
[edit] Problems
Fuels with more than 10% ethanol are not compatible with some fuel system components.[81][82]
Examples of extreme corrosion of ferrous components,[82] and internal separation of portions of rubber fuel tanks have been observed in some vehicles using ethanol fuels.[citation needed]
Formation of salt deposits, jelly-like deposits on fuel strainer screens
Can negatively affect electric fuel pumps by increasing internal wear[82] and undesirable spark generation. [83]
Is not compatible with capacitance fuel level gauging indicators and may cause erroneous fuel quantity indications in vehicles that employ that system.[84]
Not always compatible with marine craft, especially those that use fiberglass tanks.[85][86]
Decreases fuel-economy by 15-30%; this can be avoided using certain modifications that would, however, render the engine inoperable on regular petrol without the addition of an adjustable ECU, or use of multiple ECUs to run the engine on multiple fuel types. [87][20]
Support for biofuels could keep petroleum prices high in the USA (NY Times - [27])
Tough materials are required to overcome ethanol's corrosive nature, and the high compression ratio needed to make an ethanol engine as efficient as it would be on petrol; these would be similar to those used in diesel engines (which typically run at a CR of 20:1[88], versus about 8-12:1 for petrol engines [89].) Diesel engines cost significantly more than similar-sized ordinary petrol engines as a result of the more advanced materials used in their construction.
Whether the energy balance of ethanol - that is, whether the fuel contains more energy than was used to produce it - is positive or negative is debatable [90][91], as is whether or not the land used to grow the crop was obtained by, say, chopping down a rainforest, in which case the ethanol produced is just as unenvironmentally-friendly as fossil fuel due to the carbon released by the dead plants. [92]
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment