• Narrow screen resolution
  • Wide screen resolution
  • Auto width resolution
  • Increase font size
  • Decrease font size
  • Default font size

Right Side News

Saturday
Oct 11th
Home arrow Editorial arrow Ethanol and Corn
Ethanol and Corn

Will ethanol enthusiasts have to give up reading?
April 5, 2008
Op-Ed By Vincent Gioia

As more and more is written about ethanol global warming fanatics who think humans are warming the planet may, like the smoker who read so much about the bad effects of smoking he gave up reading, will do as their tobacco-addicted counterparts are want to do.

Corn prices have soared to $6.00 a bushel, an increase of over 30% in just the first four months of this year. The usual reason for high prices apply, demand exceeds the supply. Being businessmen, farmers have naturally switched much of their acreage to growing corn but though this has not stopped the pressure to drive up corn prices, it has had the effect of the rising prices of many, many other products purchased by families across the globe.

To show how astute experts are, Elaine Kub a grains analyst with DTN in Omaha, Nebraska, said "It's a demand-driven market and we may not be planting enough acres to supply demand, so that adds to the bullishness of corn". To that sage comment, I might say "duh?"

The only problem with planting still more corn is that it will exacerbate price increases of those products made from corn or otherwise relying on corn for food production, such as livestock whose principal diet is corn. Furthermore, even if all available acreage was devoted to corn production it still would not enable the country to produce all ethanol mandated by inane climate control laws enacted by federal and state governments for use in the transportation industry.

Record prices enjoyed by corn farmers, most of whom are huge agriculture conglomerates not mom and pop farmers, also result in record profits at the expense of higher grocery bills. Livestock producers pass along higher animal feed costs to consumers so those buying beef and pork will find summer barbeques will be more expensive.

But the "trickle up" result of high corn prices does not stop at protein in our diet; it will also affect our collective "sweet tooth". Corn syrup is used in everything from candy to soft drinks.

So what is the plus side of the ethanol craze; absolutely nothing. It has been established that ethanol is far less efficient as a vehicle fuel than gasoline or diesel and ethanol would not be commercially viable as a partial replacement for gasoline usage without the government subsidy of over $0.50 per gallon. Even so it is reported that current price of ethanol is above $2.50 per gallon.

There are an estimated 147 ethanol plants in the country having a capacity to produce about 8.5 billion gallons a year. Motor fuel requirements are over 150 billion gallons a year and if all gas stations sold "E-85" (a fuel blend with 85% ethanol and 15% gasoline) we would need over 127.5 billion gallons of ethanol to fuel vehicles in this country; imagine if you can how this would affect food prices around the world.

Of course gas stations would all have to make E-85 available to motorists; right now, for example, there is only one station in southern California (in San Diego) that has E-85 available for fools that don't mind damaging their vehicle engines to buy (using ethanol in engines not adapted to use such fuels causes severe engine damage).

It has been reported that 20% of last year's crop of 13 billion bushels of corn was used in ethanol production and that in the year ending August, 2009, this amount will increase to 30% for ethanol production. Consumers in the United States will be able to track the increasing allotment of acreage to supply corn for ethanol by the increase in what they pay at the supermarkets to feed their families.

Vincent Gioia is a retired patent attorney living in Palm Desert, California. His articles may be read at www.vincentgioia.com and he may be contacted at This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it

Sphere: Related Content
Trackback(0)
Comments (2)Add Comment
You've got that mostly wring
written by Steve, April 07, 2008
First of all the price of corn is not entirely based on supply and demand. If the speculators were not artificially holding up the price we would be in the $4.00-$4.50 range for corn prices. According to economist Richard Perrin. about 40 percent of the increase in corn prices, can be attributed to the demand for ethanol. Adding to the corn demand are increased world population, income growth around the world and speculators bidding on commodities.
During a five-year period ending in February, ethanol was responsible for food prices rising by no more than 2 percent while total U.S. food prices went up about 16 percent. All grains make up about 3% of the food costs, so if the price of grains doubles we would see a 3% increase. What would the cost of gasoline be if we suddenly shut down 5% of the refining capacity in the US? That's a scary thought, But getting rid of ethanol would do just that. Keep in mind that the byproduct of corn ethanol is a very high protein feed supplement. The only thing used for ethanol is the starch, and the nutrients remain with the byproduct.
The industry is not trying to replace all gasoline with corn ethanol. The success of the corn ethanol industry is leading to research in cellulosic ethanol which will be a major factor on lessening our support of foreign oil. At a time when the jobless rates are rising and our economy is struggling due to high oil prices and a housing debacle, the ethanol industry is creating jobs and keeping some dollars in the US.
Don't think of E85 as the only ethanol. It makes up less than 1% of the ethanol sold in the US. E10 makes up the bulk of the sales. I agree that the auto industry must do more to improve mileage and the E85 loophole gives them an out for some of their SUV production. The latest studies have shown that a 30% blend in a flex fuel vehicle will get better mileage than on regular gasoline.
The ethanol industry generated 1.2 billion dollars more in federal tax revenue than was paid out in subsidies, so the blenders credit is not costing the taxpayer anything. This does not include the state and local revenue generated by the industry. Furthermore, that subsidy should be passed to the consumer in lower prices for ethanol blends. For example in South Dakota we are currently paying 3.29 for regualr 87 octane and 3.19 for ethanol enriched 89 octane. I know that is not the case throughout the country, because the oil companies do not have the same pressure to price the ethanol to reflect their cost. This is a very unusuale industry because ethanol needs to be marketed by the oil companies which are their primary competitors. That is why a mandate is needed. Sorry I have rambled so long on this, but it is very frustrating to see all the negative publicity about an industry that is doing good things for this country. It's not perfect, but giant strides are made every day to make this a better product for everyone.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
You got that right
written by fthefarmer, April 06, 2008
Vince,

You nailed it in short order. The idea that food can be used as fuel is something only the morons in congress (and the White House) could embrace. GM, Ford, and Chrysler sudden stewardship of the environment is simply a way to continue to make gas guzzlers thanks to E85 an extremely inefficient fuel. The CAFE standards call for all car companies to acheive an average MPG for all vehicles. I believe the most recent number is 33 MPG. Well if you make the biggest money off of 10 miles per gallon SUV's you would hate to say good bye to them wouldn't you?
The CAFE standards has a loophole, that being that an E85 vehicle operating on E85 has it's s MPG calculated against the actual amount of gasoline in the blend (15%) if you divide 100% fuel by 15% gasoline you get the multipler to the mpg (666) therefore a gas guzzling 10 MPG SUV is given credit for 66.6 MPG. If you sell one SUV like this you can have 3 vehicles only acheiving 24 MPG and this gas guzzling SUV and you average more than 34 MPG overall.
GM is not the only one taking advantage of this free ride Ford and Chrysler are too. The big three are heading down the toilet and this is just their hands clinging to the rim.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: -1

Write comment
You must be logged in to a comment. Please register if you do not have an account yet.

busy
 
Advertise Here New Ad Blocks available. Static, non-rotational, flash or static, 24/7 exposure for your product or service prime visible location on RSN 180 x 80 email This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it
Lost Password? No account yet? Register

Free Newsletter Sign up Now



20080808_smallvoterguide.jpg

moveoffnet180x78.jpg
nma_button_proud_partner_round_nma_whi.gif