A colleague mentioned this to me last week and lo and behold it hit the news today..... the much touted corn-based Ethanol, marketed heavily as the "silver bullet" alternative fuel source to help solve oil supply issues and reduce emmissions is now being questioned now on whether it truly measures up to the hype.
Ethanol is derived from corn. Corn is a the one plant that is in almost every food product and many other non-edibles in one form or another.
Previously, land-use in the production of ethanol was treated as a footnote or simply ignored. Simply stated, the rise of Ethanol has given rise to several new problems that may actually eclipse any environmental benefit that this alternative fuel source may derive:
1. Corn crops previously used for food production, are now being replaced with corn earmarked for Ethanol production. The loss of farmland for food production, if the trend continues, may present a problem both here and abroad in terms of food supply.
2. According to the
New York Times, scientists note that sensitive ecosystems abroad are being clear cut and burned to make way for corn-based Ethanol farming. That is grassland savannahs and tropical rainforrests we are talking about. Over and above the emmissions derived from burning, the mere act of clearing and turning the soil creates an estimated 93 times the emmissions saved from fuel actually derived from that same plot of land.
3. As mentioned above, corn is the basis for much of what we eat, from corn syrup, to vegetable oil to basic flour. Ethanol production, if the upward trend continues, will likely continue to contribute to inflationary pressures on food prices, affecting you, me and everyone else.
To me this begs a few questions:
1. If the science points to this being an unsustainable fuel source, maybe its time to just stop and devote our intellectual and real capital into something that actually is sustainable and good for the environment.
2. Ethically, I don't feel that the need to sustain our driving habits or a hyperactive economy outweighs the future of our natural environment here or any other part of the world. These savannahs and tropical rainforest are huge carbon cleaners, we lose them and we are just hurting ourselves in the end.
3. This is where the search for a fuel alternative has been hijacked by big farming interests and marketing firms in the name of being "green." Being "green" is only as good as its real benefits, if it is not scientifically proven as to its benefits, it should not be subsidized by the government.
More on this in the
New York Times, check it out.
Sean
Ethanol is derived from corn. Corn is a the one plant that is in almost every food product and many other non-edibles in one form or another.
Previously, land-use in the production of ethanol was treated as a footnote or simply ignored. Simply stated, the rise of Ethanol has given rise to several new problems that may actually eclipse any environmental benefit that this alternative fuel source may derive:
1. Corn crops previously used for food production, are now being replaced with corn earmarked for Ethanol production. The loss of farmland for food production, if the trend continues, may present a problem both here and abroad in terms of food supply.
2. According to the New York Times, scientists note that sensitive ecosystems abroad are being clear cut and burned to make way for corn-based Ethanol farming. That is grassland savannahs and tropical rainforrests we are talking about. Over and above the emmissions derived from burning, the mere act of clearing and turning the soil creates an estimated 93 times the emmissions saved from fuel actually derived from that same plot of land.
3. As mentioned above, corn is the basis for much of what we eat, from corn syrup, to vegetable oil to basic flour. Ethanol production, if the upward trend continues, will likely continue to contribute to inflationary pressures on food prices, affecting you, me and everyone else.
To me this begs a few questions:
1. If the science points to this being an unsustainable fuel source, maybe its time to just stop and devote our intellectual and real capital into something that actually is sustainable and good for the environment.
2. Ethically, I don't feel that the need to sustain our driving habits or a hyperactive economy outweighs the future of our natural environment here or any other part of the world. These savannahs and tropical rainforest are huge carbon cleaners, we lose them and we are just hurting ourselves in the end.
3. This is where the search for a fuel alternative has been hijacked by big farming interests and marketing firms in the name of being "green." Being "green" is only as good as its real benefits, if it is not scientifically proven as to its benefits, it should not be subsidized by the government.
More on this in the New York Times, check it out.
Sean