5 ms·

As someone who grows corn (in a country where the crop is not subsidized, I might add), the way I see it is that we're going to grow the corn anyway, so turning

As someone who grows corn (in a country where the crop is not subsidized, I might add), the way I see it is that we're going to grow the corn anyway, so turning it into fuel is better than letting it rot away as was happening before the ethanol program was put into effect. The problem is that our crops need to be rotated. Corn seems to be the only crop that fills the gaps that is also compatible with the equipment we use to grow other grains. The market doesn't give us incentive to shell out millions more for equipment to grow crops that are a radical departure from what we're already growing (grains and oilseeds for human and animal consumption). It's far from perfect and is really a stopgap measure, but I'm not sure what the alternative to growing corn is. That is the problem that needs to be solved. It's not simply a matter of no ethanol = no corn grown. The corn is going onto the market regardless. At least ethanol can recapture some of that energy.

surfmike 13y ago
If it's really the case that this corn would be produced anyway, then why do we need subsidies?
- randomdata 13y ago
  Well, like I mentioned, we don't have the subsidies where I farm. But in the US, it is about farm stabilization. Corn, historically, has received the most funding because the crop had the least economic value. The money was intended to keep the farm solvent through those growing years. As to why corn continues to receive the funding it does even when ethanol has created a use for the crop? That just seems like poor policy making. I don't think the subsides are necessary at all.
zhte415 13y ago
I'm curious about corn rotting. I live in a country that produces quite a lot of corn. Some is sold as fresh produce, but any surplus ends up on the rooves of farmers' houses, dried, consumed during the winter as the major starch. The husks are used for fuel - quick and hot burn stir fry. There is no need to let corn rot. Why let it rot?
- hga 13y ago
  We certainly didn't let it rot in the US before this debacle. The corn is dried using propane or maybe natural gas if the farm is lucky enough to have a hookup, the husks, or sometimes the whole plant, are used for silage and fed to animals, as is most of the corn, although that's generally sold to middlemen and bought by feedlots for cattle, and those who specialize in feeding other animals.
  - randomdata 13y ago
    Perhaps I didn't fully characterize the situation. Certainly we had other uses for corn, but around the year 2005-2006 there was so much corn being grown it started to exceed the storage capacity and immediate need for the crop, so it was being dumped outside because there was nowhere else to put it. Exposure to the elements started the process of decay. The ethanol programs came in to use up those excesses.
    - hga 13y ago
      I do remember that, but it was a temporary problem. E.g. right now at least my part of the Midwest is suffering from 3 years of drought, and we haven't had even 1 inch total of rain this spring since snow stopped. Save during the fat years, consume during the lean years and all that.
      - randomdata 13y ago
        Which technically should be sorted out through the market price. Ethanol is only viable when corn is cheap, which is only reached when supply greatly exceeds demand. However, then you run into people not liking their jobs tied to the random fluctuations of the corn market. The whole situation is kind of a big market failure full of small patches trying to stop the leaks.
        hga 13y ago
        I don't think it's a "market failure" so much as people not being willing to accept that "Sorry, today the value for the corn you painstakingly grew is close to $0", and they've been told since at least the '30s that the Federal government will take care of them (well, back then, it would if they were Democrats). The New Deal policies, BTW, both raised food prices while the same USDA (US Department of Agriculture) estimated 25% of the population was malnourished, which was confirmed by the WWII draft. Which lead to the Federal school lunch program, which was eventually widely extended to breakfast, and now even dinner I hear in some places.

surfmike 13y ago

If it's really the case that this corn would be produced anyway, then why do we need subsidies?

randomdata 13y ago
Well, like I mentioned, we don't have the subsidies where I farm. But in the US, it is about farm stabilization. Corn, historically, has received the most funding because the crop had the least economic value. The money was intended to keep the farm solvent through those growing years. As to why corn continues to receive the funding it does even when ethanol has created a use for the crop? That just seems like poor policy making. I don't think the subsides are necessary at all.

zhte415 13y ago

I'm curious about corn rotting. I live in a country that produces quite a lot of corn. Some is sold as fresh produce, but any surplus ends up on the rooves of farmers' houses, dried, consumed during the winter as the major starch. The husks are used for fuel - quick and hot burn stir fry. There is no need to let corn rot. Why let it rot?

hga 13y ago
We certainly didn't let it rot in the US before this debacle. The corn is dried using propane or maybe natural gas if the farm is lucky enough to have a hookup, the husks, or sometimes the whole plant, are used for silage and fed to animals, as is most of the corn, although that's generally sold to middlemen and bought by feedlots for cattle, and those who specialize in feeding other animals.
- randomdata 13y ago
  Perhaps I didn't fully characterize the situation. Certainly we had other uses for corn, but around the year 2005-2006 there was so much corn being grown it started to exceed the storage capacity and immediate need for the crop, so it was being dumped outside because there was nowhere else to put it. Exposure to the elements started the process of decay. The ethanol programs came in to use up those excesses.
  - hga 13y ago
    I do remember that, but it was a temporary problem. E.g. right now at least my part of the Midwest is suffering from 3 years of drought, and we haven't had even 1 inch total of rain this spring since snow stopped. Save during the fat years, consume during the lean years and all that.
    - randomdata 13y ago
      Which technically should be sorted out through the market price. Ethanol is only viable when corn is cheap, which is only reached when supply greatly exceeds demand. However, then you run into people not liking their jobs tied to the random fluctuations of the corn market. The whole situation is kind of a big market failure full of small patches trying to stop the leaks.
      - hga 13y ago
        I don't think it's a "market failure" so much as people not being willing to accept that "Sorry, today the value for the corn you painstakingly grew is close to $0", and they've been told since at least the '30s that the Federal government will take care of them (well, back then, it would if they were Democrats). The New Deal policies, BTW, both raised food prices while the same USDA (US Department of Agriculture) estimated 25% of the population was malnourished, which was confirmed by the WWII draft. Which lead to the Federal school lunch program, which was eventually widely extended to breakfast, and now even dinner I hear in some places.