People often cite corn-based ethanol as an alternative fuel. We can use corn grown in our own country as we decrease our dependence on fossil fuels. It's a sweet dream, but an ugly reality exists.
In order to make ethanol, the country needs plenty of cornfields. In a recent publication titled The Rush to Ethanol: Not All BioFuels Are Created Equal, the Food and Water Watch organization, Network for New Energy Choices and the Institute for Energy and Environment at Vermont Law School report that if all the corn crops in America produced corn just for ethanol, it would displace less than 15 percent of national gas use. So we should just grow more corn, right?
Sure, farmers can grow more corn, but we live in a finite world capable of producing a limited amount, which means every corn crop must produce ethanol otherwise farmers waste time and energy. But growing corn year after year in the same fields kills the planet.
"Huge mono-cropping doesn't make sense," said Brian Winslett, community relations director of Blue Ridge Biofuels and UNC Asheville alumnus. "Small, community-scale projects are the best where you're transporting short distances."
By rotating crops, the soil replenishes certain nutrients because of the time off from producing a certain crop. But if farmers only grow corn, they lose the rotation. Since corn requires plenty of nutrients, this only adds to the use of fertilizers so farmers can maintain high yields, according to The Rush to Ethanol.
Fertilizers hurt the water system, according to the publication. Corn takes 40 percent of the fertilizers used in the United States. Of that, 98 percent receive commercial nitrogen, according to The Rush to Ethanol. By using these fertilizers, the runoff contaminates the water supply while also hurting the soil. Ethanol plants use nearly 1 gallons of water to make 1 gallon of ethanol, according to The Rush to Ethanol.
Let's not forget about gasoline. Of course gasoline use hurts the environment, and by looking at the realities of corn ethanol, we should not forget about the costs of gasoline.
In a recent study published by the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, a group of professors from different fields researched the effects of gasoline and different kinds of ethanol.
For gasoline, the group found the health and climate-change costs running at $469 million for every billion gallons made and used. Corn ethanol, depending on how producers make the fuel, costs from $472 million to $952 million, according to the PNAS.
Initially, corn ethanol made by using natural gas puts out less greenhouse gases than traditional gasoline, according to the PNAS. The study further points out that once farmers convert grasslands into cornfields, the gain from the natural-gas production runs into the red because of carbon emissions.
When gasoline or ethanol burns, not only does the fuel produce greenhouse gases, but also something called fine-particulate matter, according to the PNAS.
Fine-particulate matter stays in the atmosphere as microscopic solids or liquid droplets. The particles measure 2.5 micrometers or less, according to the EPA. Although these particles remain small, they affect health.
Some health effects include difficulty breathing, lowered use of lungs, non-fatal heart attacks and increased asthma, according to the EPA. For different kinds of fuel, different particle costs exist.
The fine-particulate matter health costs ran at 34 cents a gallon for gasoline and 93 cents a gallon for corn ethanol made by use of coal, according to the PNAS. So not only does corn ethanol hurt the environment, but the air you breathe as well.
Instead of abandoning alternative fuels we need an understanding of the fuels.
"We have tons of opportunities in just about every community in the United States," Winslett said.
In making any fuel, we must remember producers use the means available now for production. So the issue becomes a matter of overcoming the impact of fossil fuels for the benefits of the new fuel in hopes of greenhouse gas reduction and lower fuel prices.
Society could focus more of its efforts on sunlight. With sunlight, energy converts from light to electricity. If cars ran off of electricity, then certainly sunlight changes things around. Plug your car into your house and then wait for the conversion of energy so the car fills up. This remains a theory, but certainly requires less energy than other fuels. The point is, society must focus its attention on alternative fuels and creative ways to decrease greenhouse gases and emissions.
"We can't get around the global warming issue," Winslett said. "The more we diversify energy sources and transportation, the better off we are."
Products such as gasoline and ethanol don't exist naturally. Refiners produce these products from raw material, increasing greenhouse gases and depleting limited resources. This vicious cycle continues until no raw materials remain for harvest. No matter what fuel people use, costs always factor in the fuel production.
Think globally about the products you use the next time you fill up. Costs not only come from your pocket, but everywhere else. By focusing on every aspect of how nature gets converted into a product, we can see what serves as a reasonable alternative and what hurts us all in the long run.
Originally published in The Blue Banner, Spring 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment