The Oil Drum

125 comments on People in Glass Houses

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

Nate Hagens on November 4, 2006 - 1:44pm

Remember that an EROI of 1.17 means net 'new' energy of .17 units for every 1 full unit of input. So in the case of corn ethanol, we have to use 6.88 units of energy to net out 1 'new' energy unit. (1/.17)+1.

Modern society is run at much higher levels than this. The larger the disparity between a new energy technologies with lower EROI than the high energy average of modern infrastructure, the quicker we borrow from our stocks and deplete. (alternatively 1.17:1 might be ok if we all stayed home and grew root vegetables at 30:1 EROI on human calories expended)
Is the energy quality uptick from the ethanol inputs really worth that type of energy investment???
corn prices have doubled in less than a year

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

dgrimm on November 4, 2006 - 1:58pm

Corn prices rising:

One thing the ethanol bashing community must be aware of: Almost all the subsidies that corn farmers recieve happen under the historical cheap corn prices we have had. With corn prices rising like they have, those subsidies go away, and the few remaining ones will most likely be eliminated fairly soon.

I will not disagree that ethanol recieves a 51 cent/gallon subsidy, and that equates to around $1.25-$1.50 per bushel of corn, but to say there are additional subsidies on top of that is to fail to understand how the government backed farm program functions.

The reality is, when oil/gas prices skyrocketed we had just come off record large corn harvests, and therefore cheap corn. So ethanol plants were basically printing money. For all the bashing market forces get, they work in this regard. Massive ethanol investment, driving up the price of corn and ultimately the price of ethanol down (corn is going up not b/c of tight stocks today, but what the market percieves when the new plants come online in the next 1-2 years). Ethanol refinerys will be like any other business, marginally profitable with profits flowing to those with some type of competitive edge.

Once again, not suggesting any of this is good or bad policy, just injecting a little "ground truthed" reality into this debate from a simple Kansas dirt farmer :)