Visit Our Partner Organizations
Like Us!
- Art
- Biofuel
- Build It Green
- Citysol
- Clean Energy Connections Blog
- Cleantech
- CSO
- Dance
- Design
- East River
- Economy
- Education
- Energy
- Energy $mart Communities
- Energy Efficiency
- Film
- Food
- Global Warming
- Green Building
- Green Collar Jobs
- Green Design Lab
- green roof
- green roofs
- Housing
- I Heart PV
- Legislation
- Links
- Music
- Native Plants
- New York City
- NYSERDA
- Organic Farming
- Other Events
- Photovoltaics
- Photovoltaics
- Politics
- Pollution
- Products
- Quick Links
- Recycling
- Renewables
- Revelry By The River
- S1 in the News
- Solar 2
- Solar Power
- stormwater
- street trees
- Stuyvesant Cove Park
- Sustainability
- Technology
- Transportation
- Tru Light
- Waste
- Water
Two Strikes Against Corn
Few agricultural markets in the U.S. are currently more robust than the corn market; even with prices at their highest point in a decade (reaching $4 a bushel in 2007), already generous federal subsidies to corn farmers are set to increase to $10.5 billion over the next five years, thanks to a bill recently passed in the U.S. House of Representatives. Another bill passed by the Senate would double the federal mandate for corn-based ethanol as an alternative fuel source, also music to corn farmers’ ears.
But don’t go investing in corn futures just yet. Two recent news articles report findings that may limit the market’s long-term viability. One article combines the results of two reports that suggest that corn-based ethanol may increase rather than lower greenhouse gas emissions. While previous reports had reached a similar conclusion concerning corn’s efficiency when converted into biofuel, these new studies focus on other by-products of this latest corn craze — the replacement of soy fields with corn in the U.S. is leading to higher food prices and the clearing of Amazonian rain forests to plant more soy. This land conversion is creating an even greater carbon debt than that produced by standard fossil fuel consumption. According to one study, “Corn-based ethanol, instead of producing a 20-percent savings [in greenhouse gas emissions], nearly doubles greenhouse emissions over 30 years and increases greenhouse gases for 167 years… We can’t get to a result with corn ethanol where we can generate greenhouse gas benefits.”
The other by-product of this increase in the production of ethanol created from food crops such as corn — a decline in global food supply and a subsequent increase in food prices — adversely affects millions of people in developing countries. According to ecologist David Tilman, coauthor of one of the studies, “We are converting their food into fuel. The typical driver of an SUV spends as much on fuel in a month as the poorer third of the world spend on food.”
In an unrelated development, France has just announced that it will halt the use of genetically-modified corn while it awaits the EU’s decision regarding a full ban. While this decision is most certainly intended to address concerns about the long-term effects of the consumption of bioengineered crops, not to mention the possibility of cross-fertilization with wild crop strains, it will no doubt affect the price and supply of corn as a cheap (albeit inefficient) fuel substitute, especially when one considers that most industry experts believe that genetic engineering may be the best way to increase the fuel conversion efficiency of corn and other low-cellulose crops.
One thing that seems all too clear is that, unless an informed public takes action, pork-barrel politics may regrettably get in the way of even such a seemingly progressive step as the development of efficient biofuels.
