5 ms·

This is disputed. The GAO issued a report that cited research which claimed its worse when taking land use effects into account. In regards to your other ques

This is disputed. The GAO issued a report that cited research which claimed its worse when taking land use effects into account. In regards to your other question about why its a bad way to produce alcohol, from an EROI perspective, a frequently cited figure is its around 1.5:1 (invest one unit of energy, get 1.5 back). Making it from Brazilian sugar cane on the other hand is 8:1. Whatever the exact numbers are, the benefits are pretty modest if there are any. Its an agricultural subsidy program.

CraigJPerry 4y ago
>> This is disputed Credibly disputed? We’re talking about “big oil” here, you’ll forgive me if my first reaction is to imagine a pre-completed study with all the right conclusions and a big fat cheque hidden under page 3, being shopped around academia looking for someone willing to sign their name to it :-) From a layman’s point of view the claim just smells weird. On one hand, we take carbon out of the atmosphere over millennia, compressing it tightly under the surface of the earth for even more years until it turns to a thick sludge. Then very quickly, in comparative seconds to the millennia of oil deposits formation, we release all that into the atmosphere again. And it’s alleged that causes less greenhouse gas emission than the other idea: extract carbon floating around in the atmosphere today (i.e. grow a plant of some sort today), process it then instead of shipping it across the world from the oil wells to the consumers, instead just distribute it locally where it is grown and processed.
- thinkcontext 4y ago
  The same of course goes the other way, Big Ag definitely is able to put its hand on the Department of Ag. The report I referred to is from GAO, which is much more independent than USDA. I couldn't find the GAO report I mentioned but I found a more recent one published this year by the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, one of the more prestigious journals in the world. In their abstract in addition to mentioning US ethanol raised corn prices by 30% and other crop prices by 20% they say it > ... caused enough domestic land use change emissions such that the carbon intensity of corn ethanol produced under the RFS is no less than gasoline and likely at least 24% higher. Environmental outcomes of the US Renewable Fuel Standard https://www.pnas.org/doi/suppl/10.1073/pnas.2101084119 https://www.pnas.org/doi/suppl/10.1073/pnas.2101084119
  - CraigJPerry 4y ago
    That was a good link, it seems like replacing corn with an alternative crop really is the sensible direction. There is something of note in the methodology behind the figures though: “We apply our models only domestically” Throughout the years of this study, the US imported most of its gasoline. The production emissions are excluded. It’s not comparing like with like.
    - thinkcontext 4y ago
      > Throughout the years of this study, the US imported most of its gasoline. Uhh what? We export more gasoline than we import. https://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/pet_sum_snd_a_epm0f_mbblpd_a_cur.htm https://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/pet_sum_snd_a_epm0f_mbblpd_a_cu... Even if you meant crude oil and not gasoline you are still wrong, we recently became a net oil exporter.
      - CraigJPerry 4y ago
        >> Uhh what? We export more gasoline than we import. The study data is from 2008 to 2016 right? The US was (massively) an importer of gasoline in that time period, right?

CraigJPerry 4y ago

>> This is disputed Credibly disputed? We’re talking about “big oil” here, you’ll forgive me if my first reaction is to imagine a pre-completed study with all the right conclusions and a big fat cheque hidden under page 3, being shopped around academia looking for someone willing to sign their name to it :-) From a layman’s point of view the claim just smells weird. On one hand, we take carbon out of the atmosphere over millennia, compressing it tightly under the surface of the earth for even more years until it turns to a thick sludge. Then very quickly, in comparative seconds to the millennia of oil deposits formation, we release all that into the atmosphere again. And it’s alleged that causes less greenhouse gas emission than the other idea: extract carbon floating around in the atmosphere today (i.e. grow a plant of some sort today), process it then instead of shipping it across the world from the oil wells to the consumers, instead just distribute it locally where it is grown and processed.

thinkcontext 4y ago
The same of course goes the other way, Big Ag definitely is able to put its hand on the Department of Ag. The report I referred to is from GAO, which is much more independent than USDA. I couldn't find the GAO report I mentioned but I found a more recent one published this year by the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, one of the more prestigious journals in the world. In their abstract in addition to mentioning US ethanol raised corn prices by 30% and other crop prices by 20% they say it > ... caused enough domestic land use change emissions such that the carbon intensity of corn ethanol produced under the RFS is no less than gasoline and likely at least 24% higher. Environmental outcomes of the US Renewable Fuel Standard https://www.pnas.org/doi/suppl/10.1073/pnas.2101084119 https://www.pnas.org/doi/suppl/10.1073/pnas.2101084119
- CraigJPerry 4y ago
  That was a good link, it seems like replacing corn with an alternative crop really is the sensible direction. There is something of note in the methodology behind the figures though: “We apply our models only domestically” Throughout the years of this study, the US imported most of its gasoline. The production emissions are excluded. It’s not comparing like with like.
  - thinkcontext 4y ago
    > Throughout the years of this study, the US imported most of its gasoline. Uhh what? We export more gasoline than we import. https://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/pet_sum_snd_a_epm0f_mbblpd_a_cur.htm https://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/pet_sum_snd_a_epm0f_mbblpd_a_cu... Even if you meant crude oil and not gasoline you are still wrong, we recently became a net oil exporter.
    - CraigJPerry 4y ago
      >> Uhh what? We export more gasoline than we import. The study data is from 2008 to 2016 right? The US was (massively) an importer of gasoline in that time period, right?