Posted on 12/11/2006 8:28:31 AM PST by Flavius
This just means less subsidies will be paid out to corn growers.
That is pure, 100% bullsh*t.
Each bushel of corn can produce up to 2.5 gallons of ethanol fuel. Only the starch from the corn is used to make ethanol. Most of the substance of the corn kernel remains, leaving the protein and valuable co-products to be used in the production of food for people, livestock feed, and various chemicals. For example, that same bushel of corn (56 lbs.) used in ethanol manufacturing can also produce the following:
The wet-milling process: |
The dry-milling process: |
|
|
31.5 pounds of starch |
10 one-lb. boxes of cereal |
|
|
or |
and |
|
|
33 lbs. of sweetner |
15 lbs. of brewer grits |
|
|
or |
and |
|
|
2.5 gal. fuel ethanol |
10 eight oz. packages |
|
|
and |
and |
|
|
12.4 lbs. of 21% protein feed |
1 lb. of pancake mix |
|
|
and |
and |
|
|
3.0 lbs. of 60% gluten meal |
22 lbs. of hominy feed |
|
|
and |
and |
|
|
1.5 lbs. of corn oil |
0.7 lbs. of corn oil |
|
|
and |
and |
|
|
17 lbs. of carbon dioxide |
17 lbs. of carbon dioxide |
The corn oil is used in producing food for human consumption. For example, 1.5 lbs of corn oil from a bushel of corn is equivalent to 2 lbs of margarine. The 21% protein feed is used in making high protein livestock feed. The carbon dioxide is used as a refrigerant, in carbonated beverages, to help vegetable crops to grow more rapidly in greenhouses, and to flush oil wells. Only the starch of the corn (carbon, hydrogen, and oxygen) is used to make ethanol.
And remember that if the nominal price is the same as in 1995, then corn is about 30% cheaper in real dollars!
Someone has given you bad information. Distillation of the corn removes only the starch. Not only do all other nutrients remain in the distiller's dried grain, but they are in a form much more easily digested by ruminants than the whole corn was to begin with.
Pay our enemies or pay American farmers for U.S. energy. This is not a tough decision.
...and if I need to, let it be said that I am not against farmers, nor against ethanol as a small alternative, as long as the price of corn does not go through the roof.
The potential exists, for feed corn and food corn growers and buyers, to end up in a price war and land war, to see who gets what, and the public concerns for food stuffs becomes an issue.
Bless the farmers so far for their seeming ability to match the needs of both industries, and enjoy rising prices as well.
At the present time it takes more energy to extract the ethanol from the corn than can be obtained by burning the ethanol.
Ethanol makes sense why?
Think corn prices are high now? Try transitioning to a corn-ethanol economy and watch what it does to the price of corn......
Umm, that's not even close to being true, you know.
>>>At the present time it takes more energy to extract the ethanol from the corn than can be obtained by burning the ethanol. <<<
Wrong. It takes less than 35,000 BTUs of energy to turn corn into ethanol, while the ethanol offers at least 77,000 BTUs of energy. Ethanol's energy balance is clearly positive.
Those of us who grow the grain like the price driven up. Higher market prices translate to lower subsidies. Ethanol is not made just from corn. The plants throughout the Great Plains are using corn and/or milo.
When the enzymes are perfected, then the ethanol plants will be able to extract ethanol from straw and woody fibres. In this area, that will use up crop residues that are somewhat of a problem now and burned from the fields, and also the brush and cactus that invades the pastures, which by the way is a renewable resource.
Good deal.
same flawed logic I always hear. It costs more in fuel to make ethanol than it releases. Instead of wasting tax dollars and consumer dollars on a crappy fuel, let's drill for our own damn oil.
If ethanol states were the last in the presidential primaries, nobody would take ethanol seriously as a fuel source. Liberals would attack it as harming the envirmonment (it does) and conservatives would attack it as inefficient and a waste of money.
Instead, they throw money at it, supported by people like you who by their horrible claims of "it's either support the A-rabs or buy ethanol!"
Don't get distracted by the shell game. The prize isn't foreign oil or crappy ethanol, it's domestic oil production.
ah, thanks, keith in the corn state that benefits from ethanol subsidies.
It's a crappy, dirty, inefficient fuel. Move the iowa presidential primary to be the last in the country and watch ethanol support dry up.
At current prices, Saudi Arabia doesn't have the biggest reserves. Our good pal in Venezuela does ;)
You know, I love to drive a big, roomy gas guzzler as much as the next person, but thinking about what sort of stuff my gas dollars are funding makes me want to break down and get a hybrid :P
I think this is one of the few places I can find common ground with the left. They want to reduce/replace oil consumption in order to to stop the global warming boogeyman and save a few reindeer from having to walk around a pipe. I don't want to be lining the pockets of those who want to murder us all. Different motives, same goal.
Perhaps once oil shale production becomes economical (I'm sure it will happen eventually -- it just needs time), things will change. Until then, I'll be a fan of ethanol and biodiesel.
Feel free to wallow in your ignorance. I don't care.
What, having a potty mouth is now an acceptible substitute for knowing what you're talking about?
With modern farming methods the topsoil is not depleted.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.