GasBuddy Blog

Message Forum - Read Message

Category: All Things Ethanol > Topics	Add to favorite topics Post New Topic

Author	Topic: CARB: Corn Ethanol Will Not Cut Greenhouse Gas Emissions	Topic is locked Back to Topics

tomintx All-Star Author Dallas Posts:744 Points:80,235 Joined:Nov 2005	Message Posted: Apr 21, 2009 2:10:02 PM Ignore tomintx Report Abuse Those Petroleum-Industry shills in the California Air Resources Board are at it again: From Scientific American, 4/20/09: California regulators, trying to assess the true environmental cost of corn ethanol, are poised to declare that the biofuel cannot help the state reduce global warming. As they see it, corn is no better – and might be worse – than petroleum when total greenhouse gas emissions are considered. Corn Ethanol Will Not Cut Greenhouse Gas Emissions Flame away, lobbyists!!

tomintx

All-Star Author
Dallas

Posts:744
Points:80,235
Joined:Nov 2005

Message Posted: Apr 21, 2009 2:10:02 PM

Ignore tomintx Report Abuse

Those Petroleum-Industry shills in the California Air Resources Board are at it again:

From Scientific American, 4/20/09:

California regulators, trying to assess the true environmental cost of corn ethanol, are poised to declare that the biofuel cannot help the state reduce global warming.

As they see it, corn is no better – and might be worse – than petroleum when total greenhouse gas emissions are considered.

Corn Ethanol Will Not Cut Greenhouse Gas Emissions

Flame away, lobbyists!!

REPLIES (newest first)Ignore Short Messages

jacksfan Champion Author Lincoln Posts:2,554 Points:1,237,055 Joined:May 2006	Message Posted: May 4, 2009 11:56:51 AM Ignore jacksfan Report Abuse "Jacqueline" "Jacquie" Cute. Did mommy and daddy let you on the computer this morning?
tomintx All-Star Author Dallas Posts:744 Points:80,235 Joined:Nov 2005	Message Posted: May 4, 2009 11:33:16 AM Ignore tomintx Report Abuse Jacquie, you know what they say: "Past performance is no guarantee of future results." But let's count on it anyway!
jacksfan Champion Author Lincoln Posts:2,554 Points:1,237,055 Joined:May 2006	Message Posted: May 4, 2009 8:33:19 AM Ignore jacksfan Report Abuse "Yeah, that's it. Let's base our decisions on a belief that things will magically improve in the future. Let's plan for magic to happen, which will make stupid food vs. fuel trade-off's look less stupid..." Magic? Gee, you don't think the fact that corn yields have increased by 2 to 2.5% annually for years would be an indicator of future yield trends? Now there's stupid for you, tomintx.
tomintx All-Star Author Dallas Posts:744 Points:80,235 Joined:Nov 2005	Message Posted: May 4, 2009 12:32:28 AM Ignore tomintx Report Abuse Jacqueline sez: Never mind that they assume no increase in per-acre corn yields between 2008 and 2015. Yeah, that's it. Let's base our decisions on a belief that things will magically improve in the future. Let's plan for magic to happen, which will make stupid food vs. fuel trade-off's look less stupid...
jacksfan Champion Author Lincoln Posts:2,554 Points:1,237,055 Joined:May 2006	Message Posted: Apr 22, 2009 2:16:52 PM Ignore jacksfan Report Abuse Never mind that they assume no increase in per-acre corn yields between 2008 and 2015. Never mind that corn yields have been steadily increasing by 2-2.5% annually. Never mind. Never mind. The Anti-Ethanol Crowd(TM) on here can't be bothered with facts.
Cummins2500 Champion Author Iowa Posts:3,128 Points:752,375 Joined:Jan 2007	Message Posted: Apr 22, 2009 1:19:46 PM Ignore Cummins2500 Report Abuse I like this part: A recent study looking at the total climate change and health costs from fuels found that corn-based ethanol equals or exceeds the costs of gasoline. That study, published February in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, concluded that the combined climate-change and health costs are $469 million for gasoline, $472 million to $952 million for corn ethanol, and $123 million to $208 million for cellulosic ethanol. Whereas corn ethanol is produced from the edible corn grain, cellulosic ethanol comes from wood, grasses and the non-edible parts of plants. Cellulosic emits fewer greenhouse gases than corn and has minimal impacts on deforestation rate, air pollution and food prices.
a351c Champion Author Mississippi Posts:9,021 Points:1,696,660 Joined:Jul 2008	Message Posted: Apr 22, 2009 12:31:25 AM Ignore a351c Report Abuse Good , give me back my corn on the cob
tomintx All-Star Author Dallas Posts:744 Points:80,235 Joined:Nov 2005	Message Posted: Apr 21, 2009 5:27:52 PM Ignore tomintx Report Abuse "More than 100 scientists researching biofuel production agree, having signed a letter to California Gov. Schwarzenegger calling the policy misguided and based on limited scientific models that improperly punish corn-based biofuel." Are you telling me that "more than 100 scientists" supported by the ethanol industry agree that ethanol is a good thing? I am not a big oil guy. I am a realist. I don't believe that converting food into fuel is a good long-term plan for our planet. I do, however, support investigation into non-food-based alternatives, such as algae-derived biofuels. None of it is going to work until we can effectively produce 10 million barrels a day for less than $20/bbl. Do not speak to me of government subsidies, as these only shift the costs and do not remove them. Ethanol is a dangerous game. We are 1) Converting food into fuel; and 2) Wasting time, effort and resources on a technology which cannot possibly scale up to meet the need.
ethanolbob All-Star Author Maryland Posts:716 Points:137,325 Joined:Aug 2007	Message Posted: Apr 21, 2009 5:15:54 PM Ignore ethanolbob Report Abuse This proposal is totally useless, as ethanol from corn in the US has nothing to do with rain forests and conversation lands. Increased production of corn ethanol is projected to come from increased yields and not use of forest lands and conversation lands. It is funny that they would consider something so outrageous, and then say nothing about the real culprits. Land use change? How about the tar sands project in Alberta? They are bulldozing down a once pristine forest the size of Florida to squeeze out the tar oil from the sands. How many trees are being removed in America to raise corn, or any other crop? A four lane highway is now being built in my area and it is taking a 1/2 mile swipe through two national forests. Is that land use change? Why does it not matter? This land use issue argument is bogus on its best day.
jacksfan Champion Author Lincoln Posts:2,554 Points:1,237,055 Joined:May 2006	Message Posted: Apr 21, 2009 4:43:42 PM Ignore jacksfan Report Abuse ""We strongly support the low carbon fuel standard," said Roger Salazar, spokesman for Growth Energy, an ethanol advocacy group. "But the science behind (California's proposal) is extremely uncertain." More than 100 scientists researching biofuel production agree, having signed a letter to California Gov. Schwarzenegger calling the policy misguided and based on limited scientific models that improperly punish corn-based biofuel. "Results from the model have not been verified enough to be useful," said Harvey Blanch, a professor of biochemical engineering at University California, Berkeley, and one of the signatories. "There needs to be more studies validating this method before applying it to a legal framework.""
jacksfan Champion Author Lincoln Posts:2,554 Points:1,237,055 Joined:May 2006	Message Posted: Apr 21, 2009 4:35:40 PM Ignore jacksfan Report Abuse Gee, only 100 scientists disagree with the premise. I guess they're all lobbyists, huh, Big Oil Tomintx?