by Michel Smith (Veshengro)
It would appear that, in some way, the reason that everyone was getting all angry about ethanol in 2008 was all for the wrong reason. The alternative bio-fuel, which is mostly made from corn, was widely blamed last year for skyrocketing food costs. But, this year, a Congressional Budget Office report has concluded that only a small percentage of the increase in food prices was due to ethanol.
But that doesn't mean we should all jump back on the ethanol bandwagon. According to a new University of Minnesota study, producing ethanol from corn requires about three times more water than previously thought. The study says that ethanol production required about 861 billion gallons of water. This is water that, in recent years, has been in significant decline in America's food-growing states.
Therefore, instead of jumping on the bandwagon we should be getting of is for, if that is the case with the water, as regards to ethanol – and other bio-fuels – then we need to not play with those in the first placeAside from the water shortage the production of those fuels might cause they also might just cause food shortages. After all the crops are grown, primarily, on crop growing areas that could be used for food production, and should be used thus.
A gallon of ethanol, depending on irrigation practices, might require up to 2,100 gallons of water to produce. While, in areas more suited to corn production, it can take as little as 100 gallons of water to produce a gallon of ethanol. The worst news of all of this, is that from 2005 to 2008 water use for ethanol production increased 246%, whereas U.S. bioethanol production has increased only 133%. This means that corn ethanol production has pushed into land that is not well-suited for growing corn, thus increasing water use far more than it increased yield.
So while you can stop worrying that you're burning the poor's food in your gas tank, you should be worried that you're burning your children's water.
Maybe we can hope that cellulosic ethanol can take over for the limitations of corn. But then again, maybe we should just look at alternatives for the ICE, the infernal combustion engine, and develop other types of vehicles. The technology is there. And no, I do not mean the hydrogen fuel cells either.
We just cannot continue with our love affair with the ICE in the way that we have done for so long now and continue to just look for new fuels to burn unless, that is, we use methane gas of which, I am sure we have plenty, especially in places such as Washington DC and in Whitehall in London. Yes, yes, yes, I know, I am facetious here but methane, aka sewage gas, was the fuel for which some cars originally were developed, including, so I understand, the Ford Model T.
However, the technologies exist to use an alternative to the internal combustion engine in all but a few exceptions. I do not think that, at present, we can replace the engines of haulage truck with electric ones. But it might be possible to build some good gas turbines for trucks.
We must do it otherwise there is no future for us and the Planet and we have nothing to hand over to our children, for we are continuing to destroy the Earth in our pursuit of fuels for the ICE often without even giving the alternatives a looking in to.
© 2009
<>
Ethanol production consumed 861 billion gallons of water in '07
