9 ms·

And it's such a shit product... Subsidy to set food production at odds with energy is a colossal error

• Reason077 3y ago
  It would be if there was a shortage of food, but that isn't really the case in the USA. Besides, I'd imagine that the corn used for ethanol production could easily be turned in to food should that need ever arise.
  • upsidesinclude 3y ago
    >turned in to food... I should hope they just keep it food. ; I was commenting more on the uses of government subsidy. Unless things changed significantly in more recent years, ethanol was never all that affordable. To wit: "...53,956 BTUs per gallon to manufacture ethanol. The best existing plants use 37,883 BTUs per gallon" (1) The manufacture of ethanol is both subsidized directly and subsidized indirectly through the use of fossil fuels to provide the energy of production. It is generally the case that ethanol cannot be made feasibly (cost) by burning ethanol. 1. http://large.stanford.edu/courses/2014/ph240/dikeou1/docs/ethanolnetenergy.pdf http://large.stanford.edu/courses/2014/ph240/dikeou1/docs/et...
  • benj111 3y ago
    There's a shortage of water going into aquifers to water the plants that make the food. Fertiliser isn't exactly sustainable at the moment. If agriculture as a whole were actually sustainable there would be a good shortage, or at least much less of an excess than we have now.