If ethanol production is in an arid region, non-renewable aquifers may be drawn down.
As noted previously on this site (here and here), Vilsack and the RFA tout a study by Iowa State University's Center for Agricultural Research and Development (CARD), which concluded that
if ethanol production had remained at year 2000 levels, the U.S. motor fuel supply would have been billions of gallons smaller and, thus, significantly pricier in 2010 and 2011.
Reynolds even believes that
if ethanol production hits 10 billion gallons and consumers embrace E85 — the 85 percent ethanol mix — a dedicated pipeline from the Midwest to the East Coast could make economic sense, although the conventional wisdom remains against him.
Not exact matches
A more realistic,
if still optimistic, scenario sketched by the National Corn Growers Association anticipates that corn
ethanol production will quadruple to 16 billion gallons by 2015, not quite 7 percent of the likely demand.
Since transportation and storage of biomass add to the overall
production cost
if the materials aren't located near the biofuels facility, agricultural areas are the best location for renewable biomass to be used in
ethanol production.
@raydowe - The carbon by - product is called carbon dioxide, and
if the
ethanol is from biological sources the carbon dioxide has in the fuel
production stage been captured from the atmosphere, so there are no net carbon dioxide emissions.
The key factors determining carbon emissions for corn - based
ethanol are (1) whether coal or natural gas is used to power the
ethanol plant, (2) whether distillers grains are dried or sold wet, and (3) whether expansion of corn acreage comes mainly from reduced acreage of lower - value crops or
if idled land is brought into
production.
But
if I had to choose new green subsidies that are based on
ethanol production.
In 2007 26 % of the US corn
production has diverted to create biofuel with a 7 % net increase in carbon dioxide emitted
if one includes the energy cost for fertilizer, to harvest the corn, to haul the corn to the biofuel plants, and to triple distil the
ethanol.
If imports of sugarcane
ethanol are merely going to cut down on corn
ethanol consumption /
production, then it seems that the removal of the trade barrier would be a neutral / good thing.
Incidentally, how would the net btu's / acre achieved by
ethanol production (
if any) compare to the btu's / acre that could be achieved by using solar cells to electrolyze water during sun hours, then burning the hydrogen and oxygen in a conventional steam plant 24/7 at a rate slightly less than the average rate of O2 / H2
production?
There are more emissions from the total Corn
Ethanol production sequence and use as an alternative and additive to fossil fuels than
if ordinary fossil originated fuels were just used to do the job.
If US takes a formal decision to suspend
ethanol production or blending criteria called Renewable Fuel Standards (RFS) that is uneconomical anyway, around 110 million tonnes — 30 % of US corn
production — can be spared.
The Association also claimed that world oil
production would peak circa 2035
if I recall, yet crude + condensate (ie no
ethanol, tar sands) peaked in 2005.
Between 1997 and 2007 US farmland declined by ~ 33 million acres [1]:
if that land were put back into corn
production, it could produce 14 billion gallons of biofuel
ethanol [2] plus the additional food value of the DDGS.
And
if we are smart and lucky, the cash flow from corn
ethanol will provide the money and incentives to convert most of the
production stream to cellulosic / duckweed / algal source materials in a decade or so.
Thus,
if we expand corn - based
ethanol production, we will be exchanging the variability associated with foreign oil with the variability associated with weather.
To meet some of the higher
ethanol production goals would require more corn than the United States currently produces,
if all of the envisioned
ethanol was made from corn.
If we use large amount of natural gas for
ethanol production, we risk shortages for other purposes, including electrical
production and home heating.
Is there a possibility of a better economic outcome,
if the
production of corn - based
ethanol is greatly expanded?
Since cellulosic
ethanol is created by using all of the parts of the plant being used (instead of the 10 %, mainly the edible part, of the plant), in all likelihood,
if this process turns out to work as advertised, we could use the discarded parts of corn, or non-edible plants such as switchgrass, so food
production would not have to be drastically increased.
If production improves, thanks to heat - resistant and alcohol - tolerant yeast, more people may end up switching to
ethanol soon.