5 ms·
1. I can't believe 2005 was the rage with biofuels. 2. Many people, AV, boats, powertoys, lawn equipment (it's own pollution there but that's another article)
by rootsudo 5y ago
1. I can't believe 2005 was the rage with biofuels.
2. Many people, AV, boats, powertoys, lawn equipment (it's own pollution there but that's another article) dislike ethanol in gasoline, especially for older cars.
3. Who wins in the end? The corn farmers for the past, 17 years?
4. Why did it take 17 years for this study to be funded and published.
5. If it's economical to move back to "pure gasoline" will we? Just using pure gasoline means we are 24% more efficient on carbon:
"The research, which was funded in part by the National Wildlife Federation and U.S. Department of Energy, found that ethanol is likely at least 24% more carbon-intensive than gasoline due to emissions resulting from land use changes to grow corn, along with processing and combustion."
Simply incredible, back in 05, it was one a gas shock, gas used to cost $1.25'ish on average and went up quite a bit, $3 or so - https://money.cnn.com/2005/09/01/markets/gas_prices/index.htm https://money.cnn.com/2005/09/01/markets/gas_prices/index.ht... and that was in 2005 dollars. Average car MPG got 14-22mpg.
6. This was not new, even back then everyone knew: https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/the-ethanol-scam-172037/ https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/the-etha... but not exactly how it was 24% more intensive then gasoline.
- hedora 5y agoCurrent mixes are about 15% ethanol, so are only increasing carbon emissions by 4%. The ethanol helps the gas burn a bit cleaner. But, yeah, it's definitely not on the path to a carbon neutral economy.
- consp 5y ago3$/gallon sounds so cheap to me. I'm paying almost 2.5$/liter. I'm pretty sure that will reduce emissions massively more than any change in fuel composition wherever the fuel comes from.
- bradknowles 5y agoThat’s European-style taxes for you. Sadly. You get a lot of benefits from European-style government, like socialized medicine. But then you also have to pay those taxes.
- friedturkey 5y agoOr just countries that don't subsidize fuel or cheaply produce it on their own. Taxes are just one factor in the price.
- ThePowerOfFuet 5y agoMoney well spent.
- mschuster91 5y agoThe thing is, taxes here are used as a nudge. Meaning, you have decent public transport (subsidized by said taxes) and as a result people are incentivized to commute with said public transport instead of the government having to build 20+ lanes [1] highways. [1]: https://www.cntraveler.com/story/the-worlds-widest-highway-spans-a-whopping-26-lanes https://www.cntraveler.com/story/the-worlds-widest-highway-s...
- bradknowles 5y agoTaxes are likewise used a nudge here in the US. Where allowed by the special interests, and only so far as it supports those special interests.
- baq 5y agonothing sad about being incentivized to drive less.
- titzer 5y agoEurope and the rest of the world is paying something closer to the true cost of using fossil fuels. Although, with compounding climate change, prices are not keeping up. They are, in effect, subsidizing North America and China's addiction to cheap fossil fuels, which are cheap because externalities are not priced in, and are additionally subsidized by NA governments.