5 ms·

How heavily are taxpayers subsidizing corn used for ethanol? What would a gallon of E15 cost without the corn subsidy?

merpnderp 8y ago
Well, since it takes more than a gallon of fuel to produce a gallon of ethanol, we can assume it's completely subsidized.
- jhayward 8y ago
  This statement is logically unsound. The addition of ethanol is as an additive to reduce emissions, just as other petroleum-based additives are used. There's no constraint that such additives be net energy positive.
  - imtringued 8y ago
    The tractors and other farm equipment still run on fossil fuels and then there is the carbon cost of transporting the ethanol.
  - merpnderp 8y ago
    This is the first I've heard of ethanol being useful for reducing emissions. First off, the net effect is obviously more emissions since the fuel burned to create the ethanol is mostly diesel in farm equipment. Second the local reduction of emissions seems to be benzene, but is replaced with acetaldehyde, which sounds like a wash, or barely an improvement. The emissions argument seems like a complete loser for ethanol.
    - jabl 8y ago
      It can be used as an oxidizer, as in some places MTBE has been banned.
    - jhayward 8y ago
      > This is the first I've heard of ethanol being useful for reducing emissions. Why would the EPA be involved, if not for emissions reasons? The argument about net-zero or negative energy life-cycle return isn't what is meant by "emissions". In automobiles the exhaust pipe is considered a point source, not the combined sum of the production process including a tractor being run a thousand miles away from downtown LA or Houston.
      - merpnderp 8y ago
        I addressed this with my local emissions comment about benzene. Maybe you missed it.
- bluGill 8y ago
  Ethanol has been energy positive for many years. The myth persists though.
  - esaym 8y ago
    You're going to need to source that... Using a diesel powered semi truck to tote tons of corn 1000's of miles to a refinery does not make any kind of sense (in the name of efficiency), especially when the alternative (oil) can be put into a pipe line and pumped for next to nothing.
    - bluGill 8y ago
      https://www.usda.gov/oce/reports/energy/2015EnergyBalanceCornEthanol.pdf https://www.usda.gov/oce/reports/energy/2015EnergyBalanceCor... Corn is generally not transported 1000s of miles. Most ethanol plants source their corn locally. Corn transported long distances is done, but generally not for ethanol plants which are located in small rural towns with a lot of corn farmers around. Even in the case of a local crop failure there is still a lot of corn locally so most of the corn will still be local Even when corn is transported 1000s of miles (generally for feed purposes, though as above, sometimes there isn't local corn) it is generally transported by train not truck which is much more efficient.
- lutorm 8y ago
  It takes more than a gallon of gasoline to produce a gallon of gasoline, too. Anything less would be amazing.

Well, since it takes more than a gallon of fuel to produce a gallon of ethanol, we can assume it's completely subsidized.

jhayward 8y ago
This statement is logically unsound. The addition of ethanol is as an additive to reduce emissions, just as other petroleum-based additives are used. There's no constraint that such additives be net energy positive.
- imtringued 8y ago
  The tractors and other farm equipment still run on fossil fuels and then there is the carbon cost of transporting the ethanol.
- merpnderp 8y ago
  This is the first I've heard of ethanol being useful for reducing emissions. First off, the net effect is obviously more emissions since the fuel burned to create the ethanol is mostly diesel in farm equipment. Second the local reduction of emissions seems to be benzene, but is replaced with acetaldehyde, which sounds like a wash, or barely an improvement. The emissions argument seems like a complete loser for ethanol.
  - jabl 8y ago
    It can be used as an oxidizer, as in some places MTBE has been banned.
  - jhayward 8y ago
    > This is the first I've heard of ethanol being useful for reducing emissions. Why would the EPA be involved, if not for emissions reasons? The argument about net-zero or negative energy life-cycle return isn't what is meant by "emissions". In automobiles the exhaust pipe is considered a point source, not the combined sum of the production process including a tractor being run a thousand miles away from downtown LA or Houston.
    - merpnderp 8y ago
      I addressed this with my local emissions comment about benzene. Maybe you missed it.
bluGill 8y ago
Ethanol has been energy positive for many years. The myth persists though.
- esaym 8y ago
  You're going to need to source that... Using a diesel powered semi truck to tote tons of corn 1000's of miles to a refinery does not make any kind of sense (in the name of efficiency), especially when the alternative (oil) can be put into a pipe line and pumped for next to nothing.
  - bluGill 8y ago
    https://www.usda.gov/oce/reports/energy/2015EnergyBalanceCornEthanol.pdf https://www.usda.gov/oce/reports/energy/2015EnergyBalanceCor... Corn is generally not transported 1000s of miles. Most ethanol plants source their corn locally. Corn transported long distances is done, but generally not for ethanol plants which are located in small rural towns with a lot of corn farmers around. Even in the case of a local crop failure there is still a lot of corn locally so most of the corn will still be local Even when corn is transported 1000s of miles (generally for feed purposes, though as above, sometimes there isn't local corn) it is generally transported by train not truck which is much more efficient.
lutorm 8y ago
It takes more than a gallon of gasoline to produce a gallon of gasoline, too. Anything less would be amazing.