Why is ethanol so bad?

Question

Ethanol of all types can be our way of getting out from foreign oil. Why are some many people against it?

Answer 1

People who think it's bad just aren't educated. There is actually far more corn (vastly the main source of ethanol) on the market now than there ever has been before. Food resources are effected because people are eating more meat now than ever, and certain parts of corn are ground to make cattle and chicken feed. A common misconception is that all of any given corn kernal that could be used to make feed (whether it be for cattle or chiclen) is instead being used to make ethanol. The truth is that the part of the corn that ethanol is made from can't be made into feed, and there are many plants across the U.S. that make both feed and ethanol from every peice of corn that enters the plant. If ethanol were to be taken out of gasoline today, gas prices would increase by 30 cents to a dollar by the end of the week, and therefore cause a spike in the prices of everything else. And to John F, ethanol uses much less fuel to make than it takes to replace. Ethanol is actually great.

Answer 2

It takes away from the food supply leaving more people hungry.

And also the main type in the US in corn which has about an equal output to what is put in to make it.

Answer 3

take a look at the complaints against ethanol. Most of them were true a few decades ago, but better technology has changed that. With better farming methods and advanced distilation methods, ethanol has a posotive (albeit minimal) energy return. Most of the carbon produced is absorbed by the corn being grown and lowered tailpipe emisions. Ethanol production uses the startches in the corn, not the proteins and mineral (that are later sold as high quality cattle feed), so ethanol stealing food from your baby's mouth is not true. Food prices are higher because of higher diesel costs and our weakening $. True ethanol is corrosive, but so is gas (since the 80s, all cars have lined fuel systems) and ethanol does not sludge the engine. The vast majority of bad things about ethanol you hear are either not true or grossly overstated. Still, in the future, with advanced farming practices and ethanol productin like cellulosic digestion, ethanol promises to be overwhelmingly one of the best fuels out there.

Answer 4

The food they use to produce a single gallon of ethanol could be used to end hunger. Besides, It takes gasoline to produce (planting,harvesting, distilling...)

Answer 5

In the US ethanol is made from corn.  We could be using that for food or animal feed.  Its causing increased prices for almost everything that we eat or drink.  It pollutes more than gas, gets lower mileage than gas, uses more resources to make than gas.

Answer 6

The Left is against everything. Do what u can for it as eventually the Arabs will use oil as a weapon against us.

Answer 7

Ethanol is not bad... abusing it can be bad.

Personally, I am a responsible and social drinker.

Some people however have a higher ethanol consumption than their flex-fuel car.

Answer 8

Ethanol is  not bad.  Corn ethanol is. Other biofuels come from agricultural residues (leftovers). Corn ethanol  is grown specifically for that purpose,  and it takes so much land, water and enegy to produce and transport that defeats its purpose. It is the stupidest way to produce biofuel .

Answer 9

The country needs to begin having an "honest" conversation about the "costs and consequences" of ethanol regulations.

While most people are focusing on rising gas prices, world food prices are also soaring -- and those soaring prices are having a "devastating" effect on people.

Many people are now going hungry; and while there are a lot of reasons for the rising cost of food, ethanol mandates are a part of that and it is something that the Greenies need to think seriously about changing.



Reports suggests that bio-fuel production contributes to about one-third of the rising cost of food. As farmers switch crops in order to grow more corn for bio-fuel, that has a negative impact on the price of wheat and other grains. And the excess corn production does not enter the food market.

Answer 10

Why ethanol is "bad" depends on the details.  The main method of US ethanol production (corn) is pretty bad.  Here is a list of why it is bad in the US and also why it is good.

BAD

1) Uses more energy and produces more CO2 to grow than you get from its use as fuel.  When you consider powering farm equipment, energy to make fertilizer, and CO2 produced from fermentation, it isn't CO2 neutral or positive.

2) Producing ethanol from corn is not environmentally friendly.  Corn is a very nutrient- and pesticide-intensive crop.  It is very difficult to not have environmental impacts due to chemical run-off or direct groundwater contamination in the quest to achieve high yeilds.

3) The process of fermentation produces more volatile organic compounds (VOCs) than what it helps take away from gas-burning.  The EPA has found that small towns with ethanol fermenters contain more VOC air pollution than many major cities.  VOCs can be a potent greenhouse gas and have serious health/environmental impacts.

4) Ethanol does not have the same caloric content as gasoline.  This means that using ethanol as a fuel source produces less energy/horsepower than using gasoline.  As a result, consumption increases, resulting in exponentially more pollutions (both on the consumer side, pollution from increase production, and the pollution from increased corn-growing).

And I'll go on the record saying that the argument that ethanol production is impacting food prices is the highest pile of dung around right now.  Corn production is increased at a greater rate than consumption for ethanol production.  This argument is supported by agri-business and the petroleum industry as a casual justification for s******g consumers over.

However, there are some very serious up-sides to ethanol.

GOOD

Ethanol oxygenates gasoline without using carcinogenic compounds like MTBE.  These compounds end up poisoning groundwater during tank leaks or spills, resulting in million $+ costs for each site.  This gets passed onto the consumer through higher fuel prices and higher insurance rates.

The effect of oxygenating fuel is to reduce carbon monoxide, and unburned hydrocarbon emissions.  This too has a dramatic beneficial impact on human health.  This impact is greatest for dense urban areas.

Another positive is that ethanol helps reduce dependence on foreign oil.  This has national security implications as well as significant tax dollar and life saving by not running into idiotic wars.

So, here is the bottom line as I see it... ethanol has a critical role in our fuel cycle.  It's main use should be for large urban areas because of its proven benefit.  While getting started with something like corn helps build infrastructure, we need to quickly get to the next step.  The next step should be a crop that has little to no nutrient demands, grows quickly, doesn't require the use of herbicides and pesticides, and has a net-positive carbon footprint at the production level.

One method that seems promising is fungus/enzyme derived ethanol from grasses.  Straight sugar fermentation is great for Brazil (which can grow sugar cane), but we need to think cellulose fermentation.

Answer 11

Ethanol isn't bad.  The problem is that it takes a gallon of energy (oil) to produce 1.25 gallons of ethanol.  It is not cost efficient.

Answer 12

ok, say we use 75% of the corn we use for food in the US, and the rest is exported.  Try growing 25% of that for fuel, and either we lose 1/3 of our corn supply, or the rest of the world loses their 25%... it doesn't seem right to use a basic human need, food, to replace a need for cheap transportation.  If we spend our money on imported food rather than imported fuel, we still have an even balance of imports.

Answer 13

Ethanol uses about as much fuel to make as it replaces.  It's causing a sharp rise in food prices since everything-- meat, milk, eggs, and such corn in now a fuel source and a bad idea as one.  Ethanol also cannot be transported by pipeline and it is corrosive to a car's engine.

Answer 14

It's NOT.

Corn growers are NOT taking food out of the mouths of the poor.

http://www.hanskaco.com/index.aspx?ascxi...

Dramatically rising international corn price speculation has led to expensive tortillas.

http://www.ilfb.org/viewdocument.asp?did...

But who is profiting from these speculatory price rises? With all the noise the Media is making trying to blame U.S. farmers, maybe we should look at the owners of the media and their financial buddies. As usual, the real cause of financial strain can be traced to our 'overlords' in the financial district. They think they own us. And so long as we do nothing to disabuse them of the notion, they're RIGHT.

Answer 15

I never cease to be amazed at how many people have little or no knowledge of agriculture, chemistry and modern corn produced ethanol. Yet they spout off with all these "facts" and argue with those who actually have some involvement in agriculture and actually know how things work.

I am familiar with agriculture, corn ethanol, livestock feeding and oil drilling, production and refining.

Yes, there is some exciting development of alternatives to corn for ethanol production and I applaud those initiatives.

Meanwhile corn produced ethanol is helpful in the current mix of fuels to get us to the future.

Corn based ethanol has a positive net energy gain, in fact some studies have said there is a larger net energy gain with ethanol than with gasoline, if you figure all the energy used in producing a gallon of gas.

The corn is not used up in producing ethanol.  i know because Cattle I own are eating the left over meal from ethanol production as part of their feed rations.  There were eating this corn before, now they are still eating it after the ethanol is produced from the corn.

I use E-85 in one of my flex-fuel vehicles.  I get about 15% less miles per gallon.  But seeing as how only 15% of the fuel is gasoline, I figure I am getting over 100 miles per gallon of gas.  This sure stretches the use of gasoline in my vehicle.  The cost of E-85 is currently about 20% less than unleaded gas where I live, so I am still money ahead as well.

The biggest culprit in rising food costs is guess what - the cost of oil, which makes production and transportation costs more expensive all the way through the system.

Many people have complained about the amount of farm subsidies to farmers.   Now these same people are complaining about incentives for ethanol production.  Two things here - first have you seen the tax breaks and incentives for oil production?  It puts ethanol's tax breaks to shame.  Secondly, does anyone realize how much the farm subsidies have been reduced from the higher corn prices because of ethanol production.

Also it is estimated that ethanol has actually kept gasoline prices down by 10 to 15% of what they would be with out ethanol being used.

One other thing that many people do not realize is that they are using ethanol.  Most states allow up to 6% ethanol as an "additive" that does not need to be listed on the pump.  This is why many people do not realize that California is the largest state for useage of ethanol even though many Californians would tell you they have never used ethanol.  Most people do not realize how much less gasoline is being used thanks to ethanol and how it is helping keep down oil useage.

I am not saying ethanol as it is currently produced and incented is as perfect as it could be, but when you look at other current alternatives it sure fits into the picture and makes sense for today.

Answer 16

There's a number of reasons that go against this as being a desirable replacement.

First we use corn as a source of sugar only because of the number of farmers who grow corn.  Politicians fund farmers and the farmers vote for the politicians so it's just a way to buy votes.

Sugar cane is a better source of sugar, however we can't grow the quantity of sugar cane needed and it's illegal to import sugar in order to keep prices higher for the growers in the US.

Since corn is used, there's a shortage that is driving food prices up impacting the poor.

Ethanol contains water that cannot be removed.  This is why ethanol cannot travel through pipes but is transported by truck.

Ethanol contains less energy.  You get less mpg on ethanol than gas.

Ethanol couldn't compete without massive gvmt subsidies.

Answer 17

Because it costs more than a gallon of gas to produce. It has 1/2 the BTUs of gas. It can not be transported through pipes and has to be transported by truck. the emissions are actually worse than gas.

This is all a facade because the govt is actually subsidizing it to keep the price down some.

How about opening up drilling to help us whane off of foreign oil or allow sugar imports from Brazil which is better than corn ethanol? Because the corn growers lobby is too powerfull now that is why.

DID I FOGET TO MENTION THAT WE COULD NEVE GROW ENOUGH CORN TO MAKE IT TO SHUT OFF THE OIL FLOW?