229 comments on DrumBeat: December 1, 2006
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Show without comments | PDF version
229 comments on DrumBeat: December 1, 2006
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Show without comments | PDF version
Search The Oil Drum with Google
Support The Oil Drum
Recently on TOD:World
TOD:Campfire
TOD:Europe
- Oilwatch Monthly November 2009
- Some predictions on the forthcoming Russian-Ukrainian gas 'crisis'
- The US stimulus and "green jobs" for wind energy
TOD:Canada
- In this house, we obey the laws of thermodynamics!
- The Round-Up: October 24, 2008
- Compressed Air Energy Storage - How viable is it?
TOD:Australia/NZ
- Australian Senate: Peak Oil motion defeated 31:6
- The Bullroarer - Friday 20th November 2009
- The Bullroarer - Friday 13th November 2009
TOD:Net Energy
Blogroll
Energy Sites
- The Coming Global Oil Crisis
- Die Off
- Dry Dipstick
- Energy Bulletin
- From the Wilderness
- Life After the Oil Crash
- Peak Oil Crisis
- Peak Oil News and Message Boards
- Powerswitch
- Rigzone
- Matthew Simmons
- Wolf at the Door
Environment & Sustainability Sites
- The Daily Green
- EcoGeek
- Eco Street
- Green Car Congress
- Green Options
- green.alltop.com
- Gristmill
- RealClimate
- Sustainablog
- Treehugger
- WorldChanging
Blogs
- The Big Picture
- Casaubon's Book
- Cleantech Blog
- Clusterf
k Nation (Jim Kunstler) - The Cost of Energy
- David Strahan
- The Energy Blog
- Entropy Production
- European Tribune
- GraphOilology
- Health After Oil
- jeffvail.net
- Mobjectivist
- Peak Energy (Australia)
- Peak Energy (USA)
- R-Squared
- Resource Insights
Finance & Economics Blogs
- Calculated Risk
- The Crash Course
- Ecological Economics
- Econbrowser
- Environmental Economics
- Infectious Greed
- The Mess That Greenspan Made
- Mish's Global Economic Trend Analysis
Organizations
Peak Oil Primers
Beware email scams!
Beware email scams claiming to be from this site. We do not have any job openings. If anyone contacts you about a job at The Oil Drum, do not reply to them, and definitely do not give them any personal information or send them money. Read more here.
“Most people spend more time and energy going around problems than in trying to solve them.”
—Henry Ford
User login
Contact
- Content: editors at theoildrum dot com
- Tech support: support at theoildrum dot com
Personnel
- Editors: Nate Hagens, Gail the Actuary, Prof. Goose
- DrumBeat Editor: Leanan
- Contributors: ace, Engineer-Poet, Heading Out, jeffvail, JoulesBurn, Sam Foucher, Robert Rapier
- TOD:Campfire: Glenn, Jason Bradford
- TOD:Europe: Chris Vernon, Euan Mearns, Francois Cellier, Jerome a Paris, Luís de Sousa, Rembrandt, Rune Likvern, Ugo Bardi
- TOD:Canada: benk, Libelle
- TOD:ANZ: Big Gav, Phil Hart, aeldric
- Emeritus: Stuart Staniford
- Technician: Super G
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 United States License.










GAIA Host Collective
"Indiana corn farmers are seeing higher earnings with the increasing demand for corn as a feedstock for the state's ethanol plants, said Corinne Alexander, assistant professor of agricultural economics at Purdue University. But rising corn prices adversely affect the state's hog and poultry farmers who are being hit by higher feed costs, she said."
"The demand for ethanol production increased the price of corn 67 cents a bushel between Oct. 12 and Nov. 3, Alexander said. At a projected yield of 167 bushels an acre, the 67 cent increase means an additional $112 an acre. With Indiana's full-time farmers having 1,000 acres of corn and 1,000 acres of soybeans in production, the price hike means an extra $112,000, which is "a huge, huge income increase," she said."
"Soybean prices have gone up 50 cents a bushel in recent weeks, she said. The extra money is important because farmers have seen huge increases in the price of energy, seed, fertilizer, Alexander said."
And from Texas (your old stomping grounds no less):
"Anticipation is growing in rural communities across the state as the biofuels industry takes flight. Its growth can strengthen crop prices because the industry depends on commodities like corn, grain sorghum and soybean to convert into fuel, and it can bring new wealth to communities through the construction activity and jobs it generates.
Robert Wood, assistant commissioner for rural economic development at the Texas Department of Agriculture, said the 30 to 60 jobs a typical ethanol plant creates may not mean much to a big city like Houston, but it would have a real impact on a town of 2,500.
A Texas A&M University study said an 80 million-gallon ethanol plant could produce 1,400 associated jobs over time. The overall economic boost provided by that size of a plant could reach $400 million, including $41 million in increased household income annually once the plant begins operation.
There are no certain remedies for the problems facing rural areas, but ethanol and biodiesel plants can be "a huge cornerstone for us to build on," Wood said."
And oh ALAN! ALAN! ALAN! from Iowa:
"About 75 percent of the nation's annual production of 4.3 billion gallons of ethanol a year is moved by rail, with the remaining 25 percent transported by truck, according to the Renewable Fuels Association.
Infrastructure is growing across the country, the association said in an annual industry report released in February.
Spokesmen for major rail companies, including the nation's largest freight hauler, Union Pacific, said they are investing in track improvements near ethanol plants."
So lets see...
Jobs galore, new rail development, increased land prices, increased grain prices, increased rural incomes, strengthened rural communities, increased skill and labor set, positive (albeit minimal) environmental/GHG impact, net decrease in petroleum usage...
I could literally post stories all day long from the likes of the Wichita Eagle to the Vulcan Advocate re: ethanol and the positive impact it's having for farmers and rural folk across the continent.
Ethanol producers (like any business) are going to have to adapt to the market just like everyone else - some will make it, some won't.
Peak Oil = high prices for everything and that includes the price of corn.
So, you support this fiasco? I thought you were a gasification guy. Let's run some numbers. Right now, we are making around 4.3 billion gallons per year of ethanol. At an energy return of 1.3, that means we only net 0.3 BTUs of output for 1 BTU of input. Therefore, you consumed 3.3 billion gallons worth of ethanol to produce 4.3 billion gallons. So, the net of the 4.3 billion gallons is only 1 billion gallons. Of course that net includes massive amounts of animal feed co-product, which you can't burn in a car. In reality, the fossil fuel input is almost equal to the ethanol output. That's per the USDA's most recent estimates.
But I am going to give the benefit of the doubt and give you 1 billion gallons of net ethanol. Since ethanol has 65% of the BTU content of gasoline, the energy equivalent number is 650 million gallons of gasoline. We use about 140 billion gallons of gasoline, so the gasoline displacement is only 0.46%. Apply that only to our oil imports, and the displacement is down around 0.3%.
But wait, there's more. We paid a $0.51/gal direct subsidy on the ethanol. Not the net, mind you, but the gross which is mostly recycled fossil fuels. So the direct ethanol subsidy, from taxpayer pockets, is $2.2 billion dollars a year. Of course we also have a multi-billion dollar per year corn subsidy. To be extremely generous, we are paying taxpayer costs of $3 billion a year to displace less than half a percent of our gasoline usage. That's about $3.60 in federal subsidies (of course most corn states throw in their own subsidies) for each gallon of gasoline displaced.
But you get bonuses: Like depleted water tables, increased pesticide and herbicide runoff (responsible for a large dead zone in the Gulf of Mexico), increased soil erosion (wait til we have a drought - Can you say "Dust Bowl"?), and the kicker: Higher food prices for everyone and reduced corn exports. (Hope nobody needs extra corn this year). All of this to displace 0.46% of our gasoline consumption and line the pockets of some farmers, ethanol producers, and ag conglomerates! And that's presuming you could burn animal feed in your car.
For that kind of money spent and those kinds of externalities, I would sure hope some jobs have been created.
And people wonder why I get worked up over this boondoggle.
It's a 'clean politics, dirty energy' type strategy.
(we have many such in Europe, especially regarding anything to do with agriculture).
Such have convinced me, pretty much, that what the US needs is a carbon tax (or an auctioned system of carbon permits) not subsidisation of new energy resources except where the latter is to develop new technology (analogy to the launch of the civilian nuclear power industry in the 60s, which was driven by the government).
If the US brought in such a system, I would wager plug-in hybrid electric vehicles would very rapidly become widely available. Conservation is the cheapest fuel there is.
Take the tar sands for example. Without the existing infrastructure put in place by conventional O&G production paths, the tar sands would not have gotten off the ground. In other words, the conceivable will not materialize without the practicable.
As for my post above, I was responding to this line, "This corn ethanol business is shaping up to be a national disaster. Well, unless you are a corn farmer or ethanol producer." which is disingenuous.
Furthermore, since I noted that this year's reading list included Kunstler (as did mine) you and I should both recognize that the forthcoming nouveau ruralism must evolve around a new economic dimension - energy production from biomass.