Might upset the apple cart or the grain wagon

[Ebenezer]

new study This makes sense and always has if we think about the inputs required to grow corn and convert it to ethanol.

 

[BC]

The push to use ethanol really started when we had a couple of bumper crops and the price of corn was below production costs. Instead of paying farmers to not grow corn, an artificial market was created to use up the surplus crop. Sold to consumers as a renewable energy source.

 

[Rafter S]

I've always been skeptical about any environmental benefits. When you consider how much fuel is needed to grow the corn, get it to the refineries, and then refine it, I didn't see how there could be much net gain.

 

[SmokinM]

It has been discussed many times before that it has higher emissions and increased consumption over conventional gas. I expect in 10-15 years the same revelations will be made about solar and wind energy as well as electric vehicles as those fancy batteries age out. Politicians have moved and invested heavily in those areas however and funnel a lot of gov't dollars that direction so those investments pay dividends. I wouldn't look for any changes to be made as long as the checks keep clearing. Like most things it is not about the environment it is about money to be made off of "protecting" it.

 

[ChrisB2]

I don't know one way or another but I do have a question about the study. Do they assume that if the corn isn't grown that the land will not be farmed at all? Doesn't make a difference in greenhouse gases used to make ethanol, but in the grand scheme of things greenhouse gases would be higher if corn is still grown and used for something else.